VMware instead of Multi-Boot Loaders?

[mikedouble]

Hi amigadave

That's a very nice system you got yourself there.

The choice of which host OS depends on which you use for your entertainment centre. If you run Linux as your host OS, with XP and Vista as the guests, you will likely lose the ability to record TV shows, and also your 3D graphics performance will plummet. This isn't anything against VMWare, its simply a matter of fact. I use VMWare a lot for work and at home, and think it's amazing, but there are limitations to what it can do. This would be the same for using VMWare ESXi as it doesnt support 3D or USB.

I agree that XP x64 is the way to go as the host OS. This way, you can have your 3D games and apps still running well in SLI, and you can also keep the ability to record and watch your TV on the computer. Vista, Ubuntu, and OSX can then all be ran inside VM's. If you like playing with OS's, AROS, Solaris, Novell, and many others all run well inside VMWare too.

I would suggest you download the trial version of VMWare Workstation. This will let you use the full product for 30 days so you can set up your virtual machines, and then after the 30 days, the free (built in) VMWare Player will let you still use those virtual machines without buying the full product.

I would also like to echo that I think the idea of going for a Raid0 stripe for your disks is bad. If one of the disks fails, you can say goodbye to everything on the computer quicker than I can say "argghhhh!!!". If you go with a Raid1, you will have roughly the same performance, but with the advantage that if one of the disks breaks, the other disk will take over and you wont lose anything.

Hope that all helps

Mike

[mikedouble]

persia wrote:
The main reason for doing a RAID is reliability, if one or two disks fail you information is still secure.  A two drive RAID makes no sense, you can't do striping or have a spare hard disk and any RAID features would involve a decrease in what is a tiny amount of storage space to begin with.

Now if you had say 7 or so 300 GB you could construct a relatively reliable 1.5 TB RAID.  But you don't.  Also it appears you are the only user.  RAIDs are most useful in systems that get a lot of access from a lot of users.

If you have Raid1 across 2 disks, you generally get the same performance (on modern systems) as Raid0 but your data is stored on both drives. If the first drive fails, then the second drive will carry on working and keep all your data intact.

Admittedly, this scenario is of much greater advantage to enterprise users with servers, but for those who value their data more than how much storage they have, it makes perfect sense.

I personally use Raid1 on my data disks, with an external hard disk used as a backup. I'm paranoid you see...  :crazy: