Why do you use a Virtual Machine?

BunnyJ · Dec 15, 2021

Bingo.. right tool or function for the job.

Hopachi · Dec 16, 2021

TheMystic said:
1. Lack of awareness: Simply means people are not even aware that there is something called Virtual Machine. So obviously no question of them using one.

2. Host, of course: For a long time I thought VMs won't run smoothly on my old laptop. That proved to be wrong when I actually installed a VM.

3. There are many users with a high config computer and also aware of VMs. But they don't use it because they don't have a requirement to run multiple systems.

Totally agree.
Thanks for clarifying. I see, I misread it.

Dch48 · Dec 16, 2021

I have never used one and probably never will.

BunnyJ · Dec 16, 2021

Dch48 said:
I have never used one and probably never will.

I don't think I've used one more than two times and both were to check out a Linux distro.

jvickers · Dec 16, 2021

TheMystic said:
As of now, here is why I use it:

1. macOS on my Windows machine allows me to access all my files on my external disks which are formatted in APFS+ or HFS+.

2. VM allows me to test softwares that I am not too keen on installing on my host OS, either due to its limited requirement, or because I don't trust it. But for this, one can instead use built-in Sandbox feature (not available in Home editions) or use the Sandboxie app. In fact, this would be a better option than a VM because it is much lighter on resources.

cereberus said:
1. There are many reasons to use a VM e.g. installation of other operating systems, installation of Insider versions, trying out new apps etc. Some people have legacy apps that will only run on older versions of Windows. You are much less likely to infect the host OS if the vm gets attacked. I consider the vhdx part of VMs to be largely disposable (not the actual vm as that is the part that gets activated).

2. re. MS tracking (proper. term is telemetry), then no difference to a physical machine.

Hm... Maybe I should start using it and install a MacOS on it. Many of my students use Macs. I just need to get Pages with the MacOS so I can convert Pages files to .docx and not have to wait three days for them to do it. Now, it's just a matter of doing a little research on doing it.

Glad you started this thread, @TheMystic!

PerpetualCycle · Dec 16, 2021

My one use case I have found is loading up a Macrium reflect backup image so I could find some system (registry settings) in a prior version. Talk about a corner use case. LOL.

I know there are offline registry viewers that could do the same - can't remember the details - it was more complicated - but I also had the goal to learn how you can run macrium reflect images using reflect software. Now I would have to relearn it. LOL.

pparks1 · Dec 16, 2021

jvickers said:
Hm... Maybe I should start using it and install a MacOS on it. Many of my students use Macs. I just need to get Pages with the MacOS so I can convert Pages files to .docx and not have to wait three days for them to do it. Now, it's just a matter of doing a little research on doing it.

Glad you started this thread, @TheMystic!

My experience trying to ever run MacOS virtually is that performance is awful to the point of it being unusable in my opinion. I haven't really tried very hard in last few years, but from those who I have talked to, I've always heard that performance is garbage.

jvickers · Dec 16, 2021

pparks1 said:
My experience trying to ever run MacOS virtually is that performance is awful to the point of it being unusable in my opinion. I haven't really tried very hard in last few years, but from those who I have talked to, I've always heard that performance is garbage.

Thanks for this. I'd rather know now than after I spent time finding and installing it.

TheMystic · Dec 17, 2021

jvickers said:
Hm... Maybe I should start using it and install a MacOS on it. Many of my students use Macs. I just need to get Pages with the MacOS so I can convert Pages files to .docx and not have to wait three days for them to do it. Now, it's just a matter of doing a little research on doing it.

Glad you started this thread, @TheMystic!

I would suggest that you try installing it on VMware rather than VirtualBox. While I could install it successfully on VirtualBox, I had problems using it because the mouse was extremely laggy/ non-responsive. So I switched to VMware. Now everything runs very smoothly.

This is only for macOS though. Windows and Linux run great on VirtualBox.

K7MEM · Feb 12, 2022

I was the lead Unix admin for a very large company, for over 20 years. But now that I'm retired, I don't have the needs that use to exist. But, I still do some digital simulation work. So I use a W11 system with Cygwin64 installed. The Verilog simulator that I use only runs in a Unix environment, but the Waveform Viewer only works in Windows. This works out well. I can edit the Verilog (Notepad++) and run the Waveform Viewer (GTKwave) from Windows. In another window I can run the Verilog simulator (veriwell) under Unix. It works seamlessly. And, it way faster than it use to be. Simulations that use to take many hours, are run in just minutes now.

cereberus · Feb 12, 2022

jimbo45 said:
Hi folks

I still use an XP VM to run legacy hardware that won't run on more modern OS'es -- e,g I have hardware that cuts Vinyl records so I can make Vinyl records to taste from users music files !! (quite a nice little sideline). The hardware works perfectly so no reason to spend 1000's of USD on new studio gear -- I'm not recording the "Met Opera house in New York" !!

That XP VM also runs an old HP 3-D Plotter (still fine for CAD Engineering / Archtechtural blueprints) and a 35 MM agfa photo scanner to digitise old kodachromes and B&W negatives. Works perfectly so why "toss it away". Also runs an old pro "MiniDisc Recorder" - which creates minidiscs without drm being the pro model. I think it was drm that killed off the minidisc while cd's are still "just about" still being made -- especially for Classical Music releases. The minidisc was at the time infinitely better and more reliable than CD's.

Other VM's are just to test software etc -- however I find though on Windows I have less use for running VM's as I find creating a VHDX file and testing the OS on real hardware a better bet that creating a VM -- although on a VM you do get the advantage of being able to run the OS'es concurrently so can compare for example the difference (if any) in behavious of upgrades / software.

For new hardware I prefer the vhdx route as you are on real hardware rather than a paravirtualised "virtual mobo".

So VM's -- old legacy hardware / software, testing software, some testing of new OS'e
VHDX method -- testing new Windows builds etc on real hardware.

Advantage of VM's - concurrent running, and OS isolation.
Running Other OS's than Windows as well as different versions and releases of Windows.
Running legacy apps and hardware.

Disadvantages - Overhead of the Host OS - although with HYPER-V on modern hardware that should be fairly small.

At least on Windows systems -- possible activation and license issues as each VM is a separate machine.

Advantages of vhdx method -- can have as many Windows systems as will fit on storage space - including being able to boot and run totally from external devices (aks WindowstoGo).
no License issues - if your W10/W11 license is OK -- each Windows 10 / 11 system created via dism /Apply-Image will activate via a digital license

No overhead for Host OS

Runs on Real hardware so good for trying out new hardware etc.

You can also teach windows to students - when each one has a vhdx image then they can do all sorts of exercises -- on a hose up just restore their vhdx image.

Disadvantages -- separate boot (i.e can't concurrently run multiple systems on the same machine.

OS Isolation not as good as with a VM as the OS can still "See" and have R/W access to other vhdx files. However in practice this isn't an issue assuming the person booting vhdx files has the knowlege to create and use them in the first place. Note though only W10 and W11 can be booted this way,

Totally new Windows builds can't be upgraded directly (you can "indirectly" by importing into a Hyper-V VM and upgrading that way) although WU works fine for typical updates and minor release upgrades.

So there's all sorts of reasons for using / testing VM's etc.

BTW for people wanting to use Linux in a VM -- theres the WSL available instead -- it's getting better and better with ability to install almost any distro whether in the store or not. The main problem is still running a desktop GUI -- although running GUI apps is relatively easily done. Full GUI's will soon be available and you can attach external USB's to a Linux machine in WSL2.

Cheers
jimbo

Native booting of VHDX files are great way of dual booting but of course, biggest issue is that you cannot do a major Windows build upgrade with them (normal cumulative updates are fine).

I always create my Windows VHDX files with Hyper-V first, so vhdx also has all necessary partitions to run vhdx in Hyper-V, as well, thus enabling build upgrades to be done.

Not 100% sure, but you can use vmware with Home as well?

jimbo45 · Feb 12, 2022

cereberus said:
Native booting of VHDX files are great way of dual booting but of course, biggest issue is that you cannot do a major Windows build upgrade with them (normal cumulative updates are fine).

I always create my Windows VHDX files with Hyper-V first, so vhdx also has all necessary partitions to run vhdx in Hyper-V, as well, thus enabling build upgrades to be done.

Not 100% sure, but you can use vmware with Home as well?

VMWare works on all versions of Windows from I think Windows 2000 onwards (although after version 12 only 64 bit versions of the VM software are supported).

You can of course install a 32 bit OS from any version of VMWare and for that you don't even need the virtualisation feature in the CPU to be enabled or even exist.

You can if your CPU supports 64 bit and has Vt-D or equivalent AMD virtualisation enabled even run a 64 bit GUEST on a 32 Bit Host -- although GUEST and HOST are limited to only 4GB RAM max. I did get a W7 x-64 bit VM running on a 32 bit XP system - it didn't perform too badly but that was just to see "if it could be done". I did that as well recently as a test on an XP VM as a 2nd level VM on a KVM/QEMU host -- with dual processor XEONS performance wasn't an issue.

Upgrading via HYPER-V is a good idea - and then convert back to physical -- not as difficult as it sounds if you take care with ensuring the necessary Disk I/O drivers are installed otherwise it bombs out (the V2P process) with "No Hard disks available". - However doing it that way implies you have to be on a Windows Host and have at least the PRO version of Windows -- although there are some I believe work arounds to get HYPER-V to work on Home.

Cheers
jimbo

ThrashZone · Feb 12, 2022

Hi,
Never
I see no need for VM and sharing resources when ssd's are cheap and installing on real hardware runs much better and fewer security holes are opened this way.

johnlgalt · Feb 12, 2022

1) I teach certification classes, and VMs are the easiest way to teach stuff about OSs and hardware without using live hardware.

2) I like to play with other OSs (cough Linux cough)

cereberus · Feb 12, 2022

ThrashZone said:
Hi,
Never
I see no need for VM and sharing resources when ssd's are cheap and installing on real hardware runs much better and fewer security holes are opened this way.

Huh - this reply makes no sense. How does using a vm open up more security holes? Using a vm does exactly the opposite!

ThrashZone · Feb 13, 2022

cereberus said:
Huh - this reply makes no sense. How does using a vm open up more security holes? Using a vm does exactly the opposite!

Hi,
Makes all the sense in the world if you think about why MS came up with virtual security believe it's main purpose is for added protections for people that use virtual machines for other older os's and linux to.

Shared memory is an exploit and saying the host os is safer is the part that makes no sense buddy :lmao:

Dch48 · Feb 13, 2022

ThrashZone said:
Hi,
Makes all the sense in the world if you think about why MS came up with virtual security believe it's main purpose is for added protections for people that use virtual machines for other older os's and linux to.

Shared memory is an exploit and saying the host os is safer is the part that makes no sense buddy

I think you have things wrong. Virtual Security is not just for Virtual Machines. It's a completely different thing. Virtual machines are no more secure than regular installations if they have network connectivity. They are just a different way to install and run an OS without having to set up a multi boot environment with added partitions and such.

Virtualization based security , or VBS, is a different animal. This is what Microsoft says.

Virtualization-based security, or VBS, uses hardware virtualization features to create and isolate a secure region of memory from the normal operating system. Windows can use this "virtual secure mode" to host a number of security solutions, providing them with greatly increased protection from vulnerabilities in the operating system, and preventing the use of malicious exploits which attempt to defeat protections.

It has nothing to do with whether you are running a VM or not.

ThrashZone · Feb 13, 2022

Dch48 said:
I think you have things wrong. Virtual Security is not just for Virtual Machines. It's a completely different thing. Virtual machines are no more secure than regular installations if they have network connectivity. They are just a different way to install and run an OS without having to set up a multi boot environment with added partitions and such.

Virtualization based security , or VBS, is a different animal. This is what Microsoft says. It has nothing to do with whether you are running a VM or not.

Hi,
Very kind way to explain I'll give you that :thumbsup:

Problem is interpretation of what is safe
Virtualization features are disabled by default and is the way I leave it

Along with disabling remote access as well so to that end I'm less exposed to common exploits thus was my main point than someone who does not disable just these two features.

Dch48 · Feb 13, 2022

ThrashZone said:
Hi,
Very kind way to explain I'll give you that

Problem is interpretation of what is safe
Virtualization features are disabled by default and is the way I leave it

Along with disabling remote access as well so to that end I'm less exposed to common exploits thus was my main point than someone who does not disable just these two features.

Oh, I've never used a VM myself and I normally have it disabled.