Should I move to Windows 10 now, or wait?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
How many simultaneous users do you need for the legacy systems?
This is still in question.
The issue is that there there three teams of people with random times that they could be needing to use the old system. What I'm hoping to avoid is needing three computers just for that one department. But that may be unavoidable.
Do their day to day systems have sufficient horsepower to be able to run VirtualBox VMs? It isn't as seamless as XP Mode, but would be cheaper assuming you have what you need.
Same thought process, but any OS past Windows 8 can just use Hyper-V to create local VMs, unless VirtualBox is the preferred flavor.
VBox is type 2, so treats things differently. When you turn it off, it goes away. Hyper-V is type 1 and if you are only using the legacy system once in a while, it has impacts all of the time.
Totally depends on your needs. Hyper-V is definitely better for two equal systems where you flip back and forth. VBox is better for things you only need every now and then.
Good point. I've read many of your posts on type 1 vs. type 2. I think maybe I got ahead of myself in thinking they:
1.) Have enough horse power where it being a type 1 wouldn't be a significant impact and
2.) They use it very often, causing them to constantly flip back and forth. -
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
How many simultaneous users do you need for the legacy systems?
This is still in question.
The issue is that there there three teams of people with random times that they could be needing to use the old system. What I'm hoping to avoid is needing three computers just for that one department. But that may be unavoidable.
Do their day to day systems have sufficient horsepower to be able to run VirtualBox VMs? It isn't as seamless as XP Mode, but would be cheaper assuming you have what you need.
Same thought process, but any OS past Windows 8 can just use Hyper-V to create local VMs, unless VirtualBox is the preferred flavor.
VBox is type 2, so treats things differently. When you turn it off, it goes away. Hyper-V is type 1 and if you are only using the legacy system once in a while, it has impacts all of the time.
Totally depends on your needs. Hyper-V is definitely better for two equal systems where you flip back and forth. VBox is better for things you only need every now and then.
Good point. I've read many of your posts on type 1 vs. type 2. I think maybe I got ahead of myself in thinking they:
1.) Have enough horse power where it being a type 1 wouldn't be a significant impact and
2.) They use it very often, causing them to constantly flip back and forth.They might, so worth considering. But it isn't a certain slam dunk. Totally depends on how they work.
My own experience is that I find VBox more friendly to use, but they are both fine.
-
Pardon my obvious non understanding of Windows licensing but could you just P2V three Windows 7 machines and access them that way?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
How many simultaneous users do you need for the legacy systems?
This is still in question.
The issue is that there there three teams of people with random times that they could be needing to use the old system. What I'm hoping to avoid is needing three computers just for that one department. But that may be unavoidable.
Do their day to day systems have sufficient horsepower to be able to run VirtualBox VMs? It isn't as seamless as XP Mode, but would be cheaper assuming you have what you need.
Same thought process, but any OS past Windows 8 can just use Hyper-V to create local VMs, unless VirtualBox is the preferred flavor.
VBox is type 2, so treats things differently. When you turn it off, it goes away. Hyper-V is type 1 and if you are only using the legacy system once in a while, it has impacts all of the time.
Totally depends on your needs. Hyper-V is definitely better for two equal systems where you flip back and forth. VBox is better for things you only need every now and then.
Good point. I've read many of your posts on type 1 vs. type 2. I think maybe I got ahead of myself in thinking they:
1.) Have enough horse power where it being a type 1 wouldn't be a significant impact and
2.) They use it very often, causing them to constantly flip back and forth.They might, so worth considering. But it isn't a certain slam dunk. Totally depends on how they work.
My own experience is that I find VBox more friendly to use, but they are both fine.
I use Vbox now (since I'm still on Win7), but like using Hyper-V on machines that are 8 and above. What do you find more friendly about Vbox, just curious?
-
@johnhooks said:
Pardon my obvious non understanding of Windows licensing but could you just P2V three Windows 7 machines and access them that way?
That would be VDI and introduce all of the VDI costs.
-
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
How many simultaneous users do you need for the legacy systems?
This is still in question.
The issue is that there there three teams of people with random times that they could be needing to use the old system. What I'm hoping to avoid is needing three computers just for that one department. But that may be unavoidable.
Do their day to day systems have sufficient horsepower to be able to run VirtualBox VMs? It isn't as seamless as XP Mode, but would be cheaper assuming you have what you need.
Same thought process, but any OS past Windows 8 can just use Hyper-V to create local VMs, unless VirtualBox is the preferred flavor.
VBox is type 2, so treats things differently. When you turn it off, it goes away. Hyper-V is type 1 and if you are only using the legacy system once in a while, it has impacts all of the time.
Totally depends on your needs. Hyper-V is definitely better for two equal systems where you flip back and forth. VBox is better for things you only need every now and then.
Good point. I've read many of your posts on type 1 vs. type 2. I think maybe I got ahead of myself in thinking they:
1.) Have enough horse power where it being a type 1 wouldn't be a significant impact and
2.) They use it very often, causing them to constantly flip back and forth.They might, so worth considering. But it isn't a certain slam dunk. Totally depends on how they work.
My own experience is that I find VBox more friendly to use, but they are both fine.
I use Vbox now (since I'm still on Win7), but like using Hyper-V on machines that are 8 and above. What do you find more friendly about Vbox, just curious?
Just the general interface. Nothing dramatic, HV is fine, I jut found VirtualBox easier to open and use immediately.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
Pardon my obvious non understanding of Windows licensing but could you just P2V three Windows 7 machines and access them that way?
That would be VDI and introduce all of the VDI costs.
I thought you could access Win 7 remotely without the added cost and 8 was where they started limiting that? Again, I have no idea and thought I read that somewhere.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
Pardon my obvious non understanding of Windows licensing but could you just P2V three Windows 7 machines and access them that way?
That would be VDI and introduce all of the VDI costs.
How is converting to a virtual machine and controlling it within a hypervisor any different than building one from scratch and controlling it with a hypervisor? I was confused about the VDI part.
-
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
Pardon my obvious non understanding of Windows licensing but could you just P2V three Windows 7 machines and access them that way?
That would be VDI and introduce all of the VDI costs.
How is converting to a virtual machine and controlling it within a hypervisor any different than building one from scratch and controlling it with a hypervisor? I was confused about the VDI part.
If you virtualized a desktop, it becomes VDI. VDI means a virtualized desktop.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
Pardon my obvious non understanding of Windows licensing but could you just P2V three Windows 7 machines and access them that way?
That would be VDI and introduce all of the VDI costs.
How is converting to a virtual machine and controlling it within a hypervisor any different than building one from scratch and controlling it with a hypervisor? I was confused about the VDI part.
If you virtualized a desktop, it becomes VDI. VDI means a virtualized desktop.
I thought the VDI costs only came into play when you had a golden image that you were pushing to more than 1 client through PCoIP. As a shared desktop with multiple instances basically...
-
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer. -
@johnhooks said:
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer.CAL for remote desktop required?
-
@johnhooks said:
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer.This means on the desktop in question, not on a server.
-
@Dashrender said:
@johnhooks said:
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer.This means on the desktop in question, not on a server.
Ya so in VB on that machine.
-
@BBigford said:
@johnhooks said:
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer.CAL for remote desktop required?
I do not know.
-
@Kelly said:
@Dashrender said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
How many simultaneous users do you need for the legacy systems?
This is still in question.
The issue is that there there three teams of people with random times that they could be needing to use the old system. What I'm hoping to avoid is needing three computers just for that one department. But that may be unavoidable.
Do their day to day systems have sufficient horsepower to be able to run VirtualBox VMs? It isn't as seamless as XP Mode, but would be cheaper assuming you have what you need.
This is a good question - not really sure. But, I'm pretty sure that you have to have an additional license of Windows Desktop for every computer using this. Unlike Windows 7, Windows 10 does not include the rights to have a VM of a Windows computer on that same client machine. If you want a VM, that's a whole additional Windows desktop license - as I understand it.
So while this would be less expensive in the long run over VDI or RDS, it's still very expensive, and definitely more expensive out the gate.
-
@johnhooks said:
@Dashrender said:
@johnhooks said:
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer.This means on the desktop in question, not on a server.
Ya so in VB on that machine.
Right, but I don't think it means you can have it installed twice (once directly on the hardware and a second time in the VM on that hardware). I believe (and willing to be proven wrong) that it means that you can run it one or the other.
The major exception to this was XP mode. Windows 7 Pro specifically allowed a user to run a XP VM inside a Windows 7 Pro install.
I'm 99.9% sure that's gone from anything Windows 8 and newer.
Therefore, once you upgrade the license to Windows 7, you wouldn't even be allowed to use the XP mode anymore, even if you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, legally.
-
@Dashrender said:
@johnhooks said:
@Dashrender said:
@johnhooks said:
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer.This means on the desktop in question, not on a server.
Ya so in VB on that machine.
Right, but I don't think it means you can have it installed twice (once directly on the hardware and a second time in the VM on that hardware). I believe (and willing to be proven wrong) that it means that you can run it one or the other.
The major exception to this was XP mode. Windows 7 Pro specifically allowed a user to run a XP VM inside a Windows 7 Pro install.
I'm 99.9% sure that's gone from anything Windows 8 and newer.
Therefore, once you upgrade the license to Windows 7, you wouldn't even be allowed to use the XP mode anymore, even if you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, legally.
It's absolutely gone, since it fell out of support.
-
@BBigford said:
@Dashrender said:
@johnhooks said:
@Dashrender said:
@johnhooks said:
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer.This means on the desktop in question, not on a server.
Ya so in VB on that machine.
Right, but I don't think it means you can have it installed twice (once directly on the hardware and a second time in the VM on that hardware). I believe (and willing to be proven wrong) that it means that you can run it one or the other.
The major exception to this was XP mode. Windows 7 Pro specifically allowed a user to run a XP VM inside a Windows 7 Pro install.
I'm 99.9% sure that's gone from anything Windows 8 and newer.
Therefore, once you upgrade the license to Windows 7, you wouldn't even be allowed to use the XP mode anymore, even if you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, legally.
It's absolutely gone, since it fell out of support.
Eh? What does Windows 7's rights to use XP Mode have to do with XP being out of support?
-
@Dashrender said:
@BBigford said:
@Dashrender said:
@johnhooks said:
@Dashrender said:
@johnhooks said:
Here's what I read. This is for a 7 Pro OEM
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer.This means on the desktop in question, not on a server.
Ya so in VB on that machine.
Right, but I don't think it means you can have it installed twice (once directly on the hardware and a second time in the VM on that hardware). I believe (and willing to be proven wrong) that it means that you can run it one or the other.
The major exception to this was XP mode. Windows 7 Pro specifically allowed a user to run a XP VM inside a Windows 7 Pro install.
I'm 99.9% sure that's gone from anything Windows 8 and newer.
Therefore, once you upgrade the license to Windows 7, you wouldn't even be allowed to use the XP mode anymore, even if you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, legally.
It's absolutely gone, since it fell out of support.
Eh? What does Windows 7's rights to use XP Mode have to do with XP being out of support?
Well Windows 7 Pro offered it with a lot of XP support left and Hyper-V allowing workstations to build VMs was still out on the horizon, rather than just mount servers with Hyper-V installed. But with 8 releasing in 2012 Microsoft knew that XP's support was coming to an end in only 2 years. They wanted to start virtualizing everything in a completely different way (Hyper-V allowing locally built VMs on workstations). So I'm sure they figured instead of have that mode available, XP machines could be stood up within Hyper-V (not recommended to use XP after support, but still an option). Not saying I agree with the whole bit if that is true, but it's just a guess.
Edit: So maybe what I should have said was it's gone because Hyper-V took a different turn for workstations, rather than saying XP fell out of support.
