<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Innovative Technology Weblog &#187; Wiebe Niehof</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.buit.org/author/wniehof/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.buit.org</link>
	<description>Innovative Technology presented by Innovative People</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 19:54:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>E-mail archive in the cloud. Goodbye PST files!</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2009/02/10/e-mail-archive-in-the-cloud-goodbye-pst-files/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2009/02/10/e-mail-archive-in-the-cloud-goodbye-pst-files/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:52:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/2009/02/10/e-mail-archive-in-the-cloud-goodbye-pst-files/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We email each other a lot nowadays. I spend a significant amount of time behind my Outlook client everyday. Reading and writing emails. I especially like all the “FYI” (For Your Interest) mails. Usually they are very interesting but there is no direct action required. So, you need to save this email for awhile. Your [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We email each other a lot nowadays. I spend a significant amount of time behind my Outlook client everyday. Reading and writing emails. I especially like all the “FYI” (For Your Interest) mails. Usually they are very interesting but there is no direct action required. So, you need to save this email for awhile. Your inbox grows rapidly this way and online email providers understand this. They give you a 7 Gb mailbox or more!</p>
<p>But your company IT department is less generous. You’ve got a 100Mb mailbox within your organisation. This means you’ll have to clean your mailbox every week at least and because you want to save a lot of mail you create your first offline archive, a PST file. A PST file will always result in loss of data. During every migration or system failure someone forgets to backup it’s PST files and has lost all his communication of the past years.</p>
<p>Until your IT department wakes up and puts the whole mail service in the cloud, you can use a good alternative. Put your whole email archive within a Gmail mailbox!</p>
<p>Some simple steps:</p>
<p>1. Open a new Gmail account   <br />2. Within Gmail, go to Settings, Forwarding and POP/IMAP and enable IMAP    <br />3. Configure your emailclient to connect with the Gmail mailbox (<a href="http://mail.google.com/support/bin/topic.py?topic=12913">http://mail.google.com/support/bin/topic.py?topic=12913</a>)    <br />4. Drag and drop all the folders and mail items from your mail archive (PST file) to the Gmail mailbox (this took me a while)    <br />5. Remove the Offline Archive and your done!</p>
<p>&#160;<a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/capture2.png" rel="lightbox[467]"><img style="0px" border="0" alt="Capture2" src="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/capture2-thumb.png" width="390" height="194" /></a> <a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/capture1.png" rel="lightbox[467]"><img style="0px" border="0" alt="Capture1" src="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/capture1-thumb.png" width="129" height="338" /></a> </p>
<p>From now on drag all the emails you want to keep to the Gmail mailbox and it’s always available. You can even search your archive from an internet café, simply by going to gmail.com and logging in with your credentials.</p>
<p>The mail items within Outlook are also offline available and Windows Vista or 7 automatically indexes them!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2009/02/10/e-mail-archive-in-the-cloud-goodbye-pst-files/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Native VHD in Windows 7</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2009/02/09/native-vhd-in-windows-7/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2009/02/09/native-vhd-in-windows-7/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 11:16:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Windows 7]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VHD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/2009/02/09/native-vhd-in-windows-7/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tags van Technorati: Windows 7,Native,VHD I received this article from a college: Roel Janssens and I published it here with his permission. The Virtual Hard Disk file format is getting more and more important for Microsoft (for example think Windows Azure) and with the introduction of Windows 7 Microsoft offers for the first time native [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="0px" class="wlWriterEditableSmartContent">Tags van Technorati: <a href="http://technorati.com/tags/Windows+7" rel="tag">Windows 7</a>,<a href="http://technorati.com/tags/Native" rel="tag">Native</a>,<a href="http://technorati.com/tags/VHD" rel="tag">VHD</a></div>
<p><span><span style="#ff0000">I received this article from a college: Roel Janssens and I published it here with his permission.</span></span></p>
<p>The Virtual Hard Disk file format is getting more and more important for Microsoft (for example think Windows Azure) and with the introduction of Windows 7 Microsoft offers for the first time native VHD support. Working in Windows XP, Windows Vista and Windows Server 2003 you could mount a VHD with vhdmount, but the possibilities now have expanded and a lot more is going to happen in the future.</p>
<p>During TechEd 2008 Mark Russinovich gave a very interesting presentation called <strong>“Inside Windows 2008 R2 Virtualization Improvements and Native VHD Support”</strong>. The first hour has some nice enhancements in Hyper-V 2.0 and the last quarter Mark live demonstrates what Windows 7 is currently capable of regarding VHD.    <br /><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/emea/teched2008/itpro/tv/default.aspx">http://www.microsoft.com/emea/teched2008/itpro/tv/default.aspx</a></p>
<p>All steps and findings in the following story are tested and confirmed working under Windows 7 Ultimate build 7000 and Windows Server 2008 R2 build 7000.</p>
<h2>Advantages</h2>
<p>There is no need to install additional programs when you want to create, attach or detach a VHD, this is all default built in within Disk Management. When you are working on Windows Server 2008 R2 this is an easy way to transfer data between the parent and child partition, you can see it as a “VHD Stick”. A requirement for a child partition is that a SCSI Controller is available, otherwise you can’t live (hot) attach a VHD.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/clip-image001.jpg" rel="lightbox[456]"><img border="0" alt="clip_image001" src="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/clip-image001-thumb.jpg" width="464" height="209" /></a></p>
<p>Besides working in Disk Management you now have the option to install Windows 7 inside a VHD and boot from it. After that it is also possible to make differencing VHD’s based on that installation and boot from them. Some advantages and possibilities that this offers are:</p>
<p>- The installation of a new Operating System no longer requires you to redesign how your partitions are arranged. All that is added is one big VHD file and one boot entry. If you want to get rid of the installation those are all you have to delete.</p>
<p>- Differencing VHD’s make it possible to easily and safely test an upgrade to for example a new build of Windows 7. Do you like the upgrade then you can merge the differencing VHD, otherwise throw away the differencing VHD and continue to work where you left of in the original installation.</p>
<h2>Disadvantages</h2>
<p>Microsoft originally set the target of maximum 10% performance loss when Windows 7 is installed inside a VHD compared to a bare metal installation. They have done good work on this part because tests show that this loss is about 1 or 2 %. There is always some noise inside those tests so you can say that it nearly approaches a bare metal installation. My own experiences during the last weeks are the same; you almost never feel you are working inside a VHD.</p>
<p>The boot loader of Windows Vista isn’t compatible with VHD entries; if you look at those entries from within Vista you will see some ‘unknown’ parameters. If you also have Vista on your system and for some reason it starts up in Vista Repair then all boot entries referencing a VHD will be lost! Therefore it is wise to regularly make a backup of you Boot Configuration Database with <strong>bcdedit /export</strong>, that way you can always go back.</p>
<p>An option that has disappeared when booted from a VHD is the option to hibernate your machine. With power management you now only have the options of Sleep and Shut Down (this also happens when you enable the Hyper-V role on Windows Server 2008). Time will tell if Microsoft is going to develop or support hibernation when working with VHD’s.</p>
<h2>Installation Windows 7 inside a VHD</h2>
<p>To install Windows 7 inside a VHD you need at least 20GB free disk space. For now the installation is only supported on internal disks, so no external USB drives yet. In the following procedure we are going to install Windows 7 inside a 20GB VHD which we create in the directory c:\vhd. If you have an existing fixed size VHD (for example one created with Hyper-V Manager) you can use that one and skip step 05.</p>
<p>01 boot from Windows 7 DVD or USB   <br />02 Shift-F10 for a command prompt    <br />03 dir C: (of D: E: etc.) to see where your VHD-directory has gone    <br />04 diskpart    <br />05 create vdisk file=c:\vhd\win7.vhd type=fixed maximum=20000    <br />06 select vdisk file=c:\vhd\win7.vhd    <br />07 attach vdisk    <br />08 exit    <br />09 setup    <br />10 install Windows 7 on the new 20GB Unallocated Space (ignore the warning)</p>
<p>After the installation there will be a new boot entry created where the system default will boot from. Start a command prompt with Administrator credentials and type <strong>bcdedit /v</strong> to see the newly created entry:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/clip-image002.jpg" rel="lightbox[456]"><img border="0" alt="clip_image002" src="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/clip-image002-thumb.jpg" width="511" height="212" /></a></p>
<p>As you can see the two entries ‘device’ and ‘osdevice’ don’t reference a partition (e.g. with Windows Vista), but a physical file somewhere on your computer. The funny thing is when you are booted inside this installation you can look for this file with Windows Explorer; this is somewhat strange to understand when looking at it. Something else that changes is the location of the pagefile; it can’t exist within a VHD so Windows will automatically select another location for it.</p>
<h2>Create differencing VHD</h2>
<p>A differencing VHD is a disk that only saves the differences compared to his parent. This way you can quickly and easily test something without modifying your current installation. Currently Microsoft only supports placing both the parent and the differencing disk on the same volume, but this might change in the future. Parent disks are only used for read only operations while differencing disks perform more write operations, I can imagine placing them on separate disk subsystems optimized for read or write operations.</p>
<p>You can only create a differencing VHD when the parent you want to create a differencing disk from is not in use at that moment (so you can’t be booted inside your parent VHD). Following procedure again makes use of the boot functionality of the Windows 7 DVD, but you can also use a separate Windows Server 2008 installation and use Hyper-V Manager from there to create a differencing VHD. You don’t have to specify a size; this is specified by the parent.</p>
<p>01 boot from Windows 7 DVD or USB   <br />02 Shift-F10 for a command prompt    <br />03 dir C: (or D: E: etc.) to see where your VHD-directory has gone    <br />04 diskpart    <br />05 create vdisk file=c:\vhd\win7-diff.vhd parent=c:\vhd\win7.vhd    <br />06 exit</p>
<p>99 No need to reboot right now, you can continue the next procedure at step 03</p>
<p>Now a differencing VHD is created with the previous Windows 7 installation as parent. The initial size of the differencing VHD will be very small, but this will grow during usage. When booted from within this differencing VHD and looking at it from within Windows Explorer you will see it’s size is the same as that from the parent. When you look at the VHD from another Operating System you will the normal size again.</p>
<h2>Create additional boot entry</h2>
<p>To be able to boot from previous differencing VHD you have to add an additional boot entry. You can do this from within a working Window 7 installation or again after booting from the Windows 7 DVD. The following steps can be done immediately after creating the differencing VHD.</p>
<p>01 boot from Windows 7 DVD or USB   <br />02 Shift-F10 for a command prompt    <br />03 bcdedit /v    <br />04 bcdedit /copy {identifier-of-Windows7} /d “Windows 7 diff”    <br />05 bcdedit /v    <br />06 bcdedit /set {identifier-of-Windows7-diff} device vhd=[locate]\VHD\Win7-diff.vhd    <br />07 bcdedit /set {identifier-of-Windows7-diff} osdevice vhd=[locate]\VHD\Win7-diff.vhd    <br />08 bcdedit /v</p>
<p>In step 03 you have to look for the entry of Windows 7, you can Copy and Paste this identifier and use it in step 04. In step 04 the entry “Windows 7” will be copied to a new entry named “Windows 7 diff”. In step 05 you have to look for the new entry “Windows 7 diff” and Copy &amp; Paste the identifier in step 06 and 07. In step 06 and 07 the correct parameters for ‘device’ and ‘osdevice’ will be filled in. Check the newly created “Windows 7 diff” entry with <strong>bcdedit /v</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/clip-image003.jpg" rel="lightbox[456]"><img border="0" alt="clip_image003" src="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/clip-image003-thumb.jpg" width="532" height="221" /></a></strong></p>
<p>Take care of above notation, because there are some inconsistencies with the entry that is used for a normal VHD. With a normal VHD ‘device’ uses the notation <strong>device file=</strong> and with a differencing VHD we have to use <strong>device vhd=</strong>. With a normal VHD a <strong>drive letter</strong> is used, with a differencing VHD the word <strong>locate</strong> is used. A drive letter should have worked here also, but I did not manage to get that to work.</p>
<p>I don’t know if above inconsistencies are in fact well over thought choices by Microsoft, but I have the feeling that this is because of using beta software. With <strong>bcdedit /? /formats</strong> you get a little more information but it doesn’t give an explanation about the difference between the formats. I tried many other combinations but above screenshot is the only one found 100% working.</p>
<h2>Merge differencing VHD</h2>
<p>If you tried something out in a differencing VHD and you are satisfied with the result then you can merge this information in the parent VHD. You might have created a long differencing VHD chain, you can specify the depth to which you want to merge.</p>
<p>01 boot from Windows 7 DVD or USB   <br />02 Shift-F10 for a command prompt    <br />03 dir C: (or D: E: etc.) to see where your VHD-directory has gone    <br />04 diskpart    <br />05 select vdisk file=c:\vhd\win7-diff.vhd depth=2    <br />06 merge vdisk depth=1    <br />07 exit</p>
<p>In step 05 you have to select the differencing VHD with a depth greater than or equal to the depth of step 06. In this example we merge one level back.</p>
<h2>Delete above experiments</h2>
<p>Are you ready testing and do you want to get rid of the obsolete boot entries? Start a command prompt with Administrator credentials and delete them with <strong>bcdedit /delete {identifier-of-entry-to-be-deleted} </strong>Delete the physical VHD file(s) from your hard drive and everything is gone without leaving a trace.</p>
<h2>Links</h2>
<p><strong>Virtual Hard Disk Image Format Specification</strong>    <br /><a href="http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/f/e/ffef50a5-07dd-4cf8-aaa3-442c0673a029/Virtual%20Hard%20Disk%20Format%20Spec_10_18_06.doc">http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/f/e/ffef50a5-07dd-4cf8-aaa3-442c0673a029/Virtual%20Hard%20Disk%20Format%20Spec_10_18_06.doc</a></p>
<p><strong>Inside Windows 2008 R2 Virtualization Improvements and Native VHD Support     <br /></strong><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/emea/teched2008/itpro/tv/default.aspx"><strong>http://www.microsoft.com/emea/teched2008/itpro/tv/default.aspx</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2009/02/09/native-vhd-in-windows-7/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>VMware makes a strange move</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2008/12/14/vmware-makes-a-strange-move/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2008/12/14/vmware-makes-a-strange-move/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[System Center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virtualization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/?p=424</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[      Every day the battle in the virtualization market is getting more exciting.  Thursday (11 December 2008) VMware released update 3 for it&#8217;s free hypervisor: ESXi. No big deal right?But apparently they changed something in this update that could really change the way VMware virtual infrastructures will look like in a few months / years.  In the last 12 months we have seen a change [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><span>     </p>
<div>
<p>Every day the battle in the virtualization market is getting more exciting. </p>
<p>Thursday (11 December 2008) VMware released update 3 for it&#8217;s free hypervisor: ESXi. No big deal right?But <a href="http://www.virtualization.info/2008/12/vmware-esxi-gets-update-3-and-fully.html" target="_blank">apparently</a> they changed something in this update that could really change the way VMware virtual infrastructures will look like in a few months / years. </p>
<p>In the last 12 months we have seen a change of focus within the virtualization battle. The hypervisor has really become a commodity and is free (ESXi &amp; Hyper-V). It&#8217;s all about managing the virtual infrastructure now. Microsoft released their System Center Virtual Machine Manager (VMM) for this. What makes VMM great is that it can manage different virtual infrastructures at only a fraction of the cost of other managing tools. VMM can also manage a VMware VI. The downside of this is the fact that although you can manage a VMware environment you will also need VirtualCenter. VMM needs VirtualCenter to pass the command to the ESX servers. So you would need double the licenses for management software for your VI. Smart move from VMware, because they are actually making their money with the extra features that VirtualCenter brings.</p>
<p>But with update 3 of ESXi, VMware has decided to <span style="underline;">fully unlock all A<span style="underline;">PI&#8217;s</span>. This means that any virtual machine managing tool can perform Vmotion activities on a VMware VI. This really diminishes the need for VirtualCenter. VMM would be able to perform the most important management tasks. For medium sized environments this would definitly be enough. You will have a stable hypervisor for free (ESXi) and the management tools for nearly nothing (VMM). </span></p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure VMware has thought about this as well and is convinced about the business case for VirtualCenter. I hope they or anyone else on this blog will share this soon with me.</p></div>
<p><img class="alignnone" src="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/images/crosshairs-vm.jpg" alt="" width="209" height="210" /></p>
<p><strong>Update:</strong></p>
<p>Well this explains everything. </p>
<p><em> &#8221;Turns out that while fixing an API bug the API set got partially unlocked. Yes, you read that right, VMware didn’t mean to unlock the API set &#8211; at least not wholly and not yet. So, if you went out and started madly coding some killer VirtualCenter Client replacement then hold off because I’m told the U4 update will lock things back down again&#8221;</em></p>
<p>Read all about it, on this blog: <a href="http://www.mikedipetrillo.com/mikedvirtualization/2008/12/update-vmware-rcli-now-writes-to-esxi-free-hosts.html">http://www.mikedipetrillo.com/mikedvirtualization/2008/12/update-vmware-rcli-now-writes-to-esxi-free-hosts.html</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p></span></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2008/12/14/vmware-makes-a-strange-move/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SCVMM, choose your CPU Type wisely</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2008/07/31/scvmm-choose-your-cpu-type-wisely/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2008/07/31/scvmm-choose-your-cpu-type-wisely/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:53:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Server 2008]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[System Center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virtualization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/?p=388</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few months ago my beloved colleague Walter gave me the Beta version of System Center Virtual Machine Manager. Unfortunately I haven&#8217;t had the time to play with it until now. While most people enjoy their well earned vacation, I&#8217;m playing around with SCVMM. There are definitely things to be excited about: Ability to manage [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/scvmm1.jpg" rel="lightbox[388]"></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="auto;"><span style="NL;">A few months ago my beloved colleague Walter <a href="http://www.buit.org/2008/05/02/system-center-virtual-machine-manager-2008/" target="_blank"><span style="11.0pt;">gave</span></a> me the Beta version of System Center Virtual Machine Manager. Unfortunately I haven&#8217;t had the time to play with it until now. While most people enjoy their well earned vacation, I&#8217;m playing around with SCVMM.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="auto;"><span style="NL;">There are definitely things to be excited about:</span></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="NL;">Ability to manage both Hyper-V and VMware farms</span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="NL;">Migrate virtual machines between Hyper-V hosts (maybe not a live migration, but a migration none the less! )</span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="NL;">But the main thing to be excited about is the future integration within the System Center family.</span></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="auto;"><span style="NL;">And their are also some irritating things:</span></p>
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="NL;">Hyper-V has just RTM&#8217;ed and SCVMM is still in beta. This means you got to install <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/950050"><span style="11.0pt;">update</span></a> after <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=88208468-0AD6-47DE-8580-085CBA42C0C2"><span style="11.0pt;">update</span></a> to make everything work.</span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="NL;">When I try to install the integration services on Windows Vista it comes with the message: &#8220;Unsupported Guest OS &#8211; An error has occurred: The specified program requires a newer version of Windows.&#8221; Unfortunately I&#8217;m not yet in the possession of Windows 7&#8230; </span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"><span style="NL;">I created a new library share. But when I try to mount an ISO file to my virtual machine it fails and the only thing you can do with your virtual machine from that point is remove it and repair it. Through the repair option you can save him by the way.</span></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="auto;"><span style="NL;">I properly can go on and on with these things but I can rather posts these on connect.microsoft.com. It is still a beta and I believe eventually these &#8216;minor&#8217; issues will be solved.</span></p>
<p><span style="AR-SA;">There is one very interesting feature I found in SCVMM and I&#8217;m still not sure if it&#8217;s a brilliant or stupid thing. When you create a new virtual machine you got to choose your processor type. Not just the number of virtual processors or the clock rate, no actually the processor type. Like the 1.2 Ghz Athlon, the 3.0 Ghz Pentium 4 (HT Technology) or the 2.8 Ghz Xeon MP.</span></p>
<p><a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/scvmm1.jpg" rel="lightbox[388]"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-390" src="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/scvmm1-290x300.jpg" alt="Choose your CPU type within SCVMM" width="290" height="300" /></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="auto;"><span style="NL;">It states that it uses this info to determine the processor requirements of the virtual machine. That&#8217;s being used when calculating host ratings and when setting CPU resource allocations.<br />
You can view the host rating when you create a new virtual machine. The host rating helps you to choose the best host for your virtual machine. Based on free resources.<br />
CPU resource allocation is something we know from VMware ESX. VMware uses shares to do this. A plain number like 1000 or 2000. The virtual machine with 2000 shares gets twice the amount of CPU cycles (when needed) in comparison with the machine that has 1000 shares.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="auto;"><span style="NL;">I understand that SCVMM should use his own system that can be plotted on all the different virtualization platforms it&#8217;s going to manage (Hyper-V, XEN, ESX). But I don&#8217;t understand how a 2.4 Ghz Opteron relates to a 2.4 Ghz Xeon.<br />
So if I just want my production server to have a 50% preference over my test server which should I choose? And what&#8217;s worse, if I&#8217;m in doubt with this option, how about a self service user that&#8217;s got the option to create a new virtual machine? I can imagine it would properly mean that this user got the advise to skip it.</span></p>
<p><span style="AR-SA;">But there is one more thing confusing about this. When you use the Virtual Machine Manager snap in, there is another way to set the processor weight and you can use a simple number!</span><br />
<a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/vmm.jpg" rel="lightbox[388]"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-391" src="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/vmm.jpg" alt="VMM Processor Resources" width="441" height="334" /></a></p>
<p>So if I change the processor type in SCVMM of a virtual machine, you would suspect something to change within this screen. But it doesn&#8217;t&#8230; Neither does it the other way around.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to investigate some more but if you got some tips or hints, please post them!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/scvmm.jpg" rel="lightbox[388]"></a><a href="http://www.buit.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/scvmm.jpg" rel="lightbox[388]"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2008/07/31/scvmm-choose-your-cpu-type-wisely/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Open Virtual Machine Format</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2008/02/26/the-open-virtual-machine-format/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2008/02/26/the-open-virtual-machine-format/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:27:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/2008/02/26/the-open-virtual-machine-format/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi, I&#8217;m at Vmworld 2008 Europe (Cannes) right now. Virtualisation is hot and you can tell by the enormous amount of people that came to Cannes. A lot of interesting new product and enhancements have been release here today but there is one thing I want to mention here. The Open Virtual Machine Format (OVF). At this [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m at Vmworld 2008 Europe (Cannes) right now. Virtualisation is hot and you can tell by the enormous amount of people that came to Cannes. A lot of interesting new product and enhancements have been release here today but there is one thing I want to mention here.</p>
<p>The Open Virtual Machine Format (OVF). At this point it is still in beta (0.9) but a 1.0 version is coming out very shortly. It&#8217;s a new way you on how to offer your virtual appliances and supported by Vmware, Citrix (Xenserver) and Microsoft Hyper-V. You can create your virtual appliance in any of these environments and package it as an OVF package. The virtual appliance can even exist out of multiple virtual machine.</p>
<p>This OVF package can be imported on to any of these hypervisors (that&#8217;s the open part of it) and it automatically build the right virtual machine(s) with the correct virtual components (Nic&#8217;s, CPU, memory etc). It also builds the correct virtual disk format, VMDK, VHD or even RDM or NTFS.</p>
<p>Read more about this new portable virtual machine format here: <a href="http://www.vmware.com/go/ovf">http://www.vmware.com/go/ovf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2008/02/26/the-open-virtual-machine-format/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Linux will not displace Windows</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2008/02/06/why-linux-will-not-displace-windows/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2008/02/06/why-linux-will-not-displace-windows/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:48:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vista]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Humor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/2008/02/06/why-linux-will-not-displace-windows/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I found this post on ZDNET and it totally convinced me!  =========================== &#8220;You are kidding arent you ? Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?That sounds preposterous to me. If it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<dt>I found this post on ZDNET and it totally convinced me!<strong> </strong></dt>
<p><strong>===========================</strong></p>
<p><strong><em>&#8220;You are kidding arent you ? </em></strong></p>
<p><em>Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?</em><em>That sounds preposterous to me.</p>
<p>If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.</p>
<p>Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.</p>
<p>Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.</p>
<p>I think you need to re-examine your assumptions. &#8221;</p>
<p></em><a href="http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12355-0.html?forumID=1&amp;threadID=31199&amp;messageID=579806&amp;start=-9530">http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12355-0.html?forumID=1&amp;threadID=31199&amp;messageID=579806&amp;start=-9530</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2008/02/06/why-linux-will-not-displace-windows/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Microsoft Surface. Want one? Build your own!</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2007/06/04/microsoft-surface-want-one-build-your-own/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2007/06/04/microsoft-surface-want-one-build-your-own/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2007 09:48:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/2007/06/04/microsoft-surface-want-one-build-your-own/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few days ago Microsoft announced a very cool, promising and high tech table! It&#8217;s called &#8220;Microsoft Surface&#8221;. If you haven&#8217;t heard of it already check out a quick demo of it&#8217;s capabilities: When you search YouTube for a while you will find more great previews of Microsoft Surface like this one, or this on [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few days ago Microsoft announced a very cool, promising and high tech table! It&#8217;s called &#8220;Microsoft Surface&#8221;.</p>
<p>If you haven&#8217;t heard of it already check out a quick demo of it&#8217;s capabilities:<br />
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rP5y7yp06n0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rP5y7yp06n0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object><br />
When you search  YouTube for a while you will find more great previews of Microsoft Surface like <a TARGET="_blank" HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlZxuqjJDgk">this one</a>, or <a TARGET="_blank" HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WIkrQu0-v0"> this on with Bill Gates</a> or <a TARGET="_blank" HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9j_tYP-kzc">this quick review from  popularmechanics.com</a>.</p>
<p>But when you search on you will find some other (older) video&#8217;s of a similar product from a Mr Han and his company Perceptive Pixel (he also comes back in the review from  popularmachines.com).<br />
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/89sz8ExZndc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/89sz8ExZndc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object><br />
Ok, so Microsoft isn&#8217;t the first one to announce a product like this, they are working on it for a really long time (from 2001) and the product looks great. So their is no reason to become less  enthousiastic.</p>
<p>The next questions is: where can I buy this and for how much? Unfortunately you&#8217;ll have to wait till at least the winter of 2007 to have your own Minority Report experience. And by then it will cost around the $5000-$10.000.</p>
<p>But thank god for the Internet because their is a cheap way you can build your own Surface. For as little as $10 you can buy <a TARGET="_blank" HREF="https://portal.acm.org/poplogin.cfm?dl=GUIDE&amp;coll=GUIDE&amp;comp_id=1095054&amp;want_href=delivery%2Ecfm%3Fid%3D1095054%26type%3Dpdf%26CFID%3D67837490%26CFTOKEN%3D2229577&amp;off=account_only&amp;CFID=67837490&amp;CFTOKEN=2229577&amp;td=1">an article</a> about how to make your own Low-cost multi-touch sensing through frustrated total internal reflection. Written by the same Mr Han again!</p>
<p>If even those ten dollars sounds to expensive for you, I&#8217;ve found an other short description on Tinker.it on how to build your own. This is all you need:</p>
<p>1 panel of  plexiglass 8mm thickness<br />
2 strips of IR  LEDs (18 LED per strip)<br />
2 sheets of tracing paper<br />
1 projector<br />
1 mirror<br />
1 analog camera sensitive to IR light<br />
1 IR filter for the camera<br />
1 computer</p>
<p>Read the whole article <a TARGET="_blank" HREF="http://tinker.it/now/2007/02/28/multitouch-table-experiment/">here</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2007/06/04/microsoft-surface-want-one-build-your-own/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Charity @ Microsoft</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2007/02/27/no-charity-microsoft/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2007/02/27/no-charity-microsoft/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:08:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vista]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/2007/02/27/no-charity-microsoft/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There has been a lot of fuss about Microsoft&#8217;s virtualization licensing and distribution policies. The biggest player in this market (and properbly the most affected), VMware, is pissedÂ andÂ posted a whitepaper with their 7 complaints. Â VMware seven objections are: 1) Microsoft offers top virtualization support for only premier-level support customers, inherently limiting the ability for many [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There has been a lot of fuss about Microsoft&#8217;s virtualization licensing and distribution policies. The biggest player in this market (and properbly the most affected), VMware, is pissedÂ andÂ posted a <a href="http://www.vmware.com/solutions/whitepapers/msoft_licensing_wp.html" title="whitepaper">whitepaper</a> with their 7 complaints.</p>
<p><font size="2"><br />
Â <strong>VMware seven objections are:</strong><br />
<strong>1)</strong> Microsoft offers top virtualization support for only premier-level support customers, inherently limiting the ability for many customers to get technical support for competitive virtualization platforms;</font><font size="2"><strong>2)</strong>Â Microsoft&#8217;s &#8220;restrictive terms&#8221; on the use of published virtual machines, or appliances, is unfair to users. Microsoft, VMware claims, restricts use of VHD formatted virtual machines to Microsoft Virtual Server and Virtual PC only;</p>
<p><strong>3)</strong> Microsoft restricts customer choice by configuring its VHD virtual machines to de-activate if they are run on any virtualization offering other than Virtual PC or Virtual Server;</p>
<p><strong>4)</strong>Â Microsoft&#8217;s VHD licensing agreement prevents users from converting the VHD format into any virtual machine format, thus preventing compatibility with competitive platform and preventing translations into VMware&#8217;s formats;</p>
<p><strong>5)</strong>Â Microsoft&#8217;s licensing policies discriminate against use of VMware&#8217;s Vmotion and other virtualization management platforms that enable users to move virtual machines from one platform to another. VMware cites one policy that requires &#8220;permanent assignment&#8221; of operating system licenses to specific systems and simultaneously restricts the movement of those operating system licenses. VMware claims that one policy, for example, is designed to restrict movement of Windows server licenses more than once every quarter.</p>
<p><strong>6)</strong>Â Microsoft imposes significant restrictions on desktop virtualization including the movement of desktop virtual machines, restrictions on OEM versions of Windows, and restrictions on virtualization on Windows Vista. VMware charges that this makes it difficult if not impossible for end users to choose competitive platforms. VMware attempts to back its case by pointing out that VMware once had an OEM license to redistribute Windows in a VMware VM but has not been able to renew that since 2003.</p>
<p><strong>7)</strong>Â Finally, VMware claims that Microsoft&#8217;s virtualization APIs for Longhorn are proprietary. The APIs handle communication between Windows and the Microsoft hypervisor. VMware said Microsoft opened up three virtualization APIs last June but they cannot be used by virtualization vendors.</p>
<p></font>Does this mean we can put virtualization in the same category as the browser and the mediaplayer?&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2007/02/27/no-charity-microsoft/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>VMware DiskMount Utility for everyone</title>
		<link>http://www.buit.org/2007/02/07/vmware-diskmount-utility-for-everyone/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buit.org/2007/02/07/vmware-diskmount-utility-for-everyone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 11:59:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wiebe Niehof</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Virtualization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buit.org/2007/02/07/vmware-diskmount-utility-for-everyone/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The VMware DiskMount Utility allows you to mount an unused virtual disk in a Windows host file system as a separate drive without needing to connect to the virtual disk from within a virtual machine. You can mount specific volumes of a virtual disk if the virtual disk is partitioned. DiskMount is a command line [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The VMware DiskMount Utility allows you to mount an unused virtual disk in a<br />
Windows host file system as a separate drive without needing to connect to the<br />
virtual disk from within a virtual machine. You can mount specific volumes of a virtual<br />
disk if the virtual disk is partitioned.<br />
DiskMount is a <strong>command line</strong> program called vmware-mount that works similarly<br />
to how you use the subst command on Windows. Once the disk is mounted, you<br />
can read from and write to the disk as if it were a separate file system with its own<br />
drive letter on your network. However, you cannot power on any virtual machine that<br />
uses this disk until the disk is unmounted.<br />
You can perform activities such as scanning a virtual disk for viruses and transferring<br />
files between the host system and a powered off virtual machine.<br />
When you are finished using the mounted virtual disk, delete the mapping so the<br />
virtual disk can be used by virtual machines again.</p>
<p>This tool isnâ€™t exactly new (it get&#8217;s installed with VMWare server automatically) but I do find it underappreciated. And so does VMWare. In their new VMWare Workstation 6 (beta <a href="http://www.vmware.com/products/beta/ws/" title="now">now</a> available) they are building it in the GUI. No more remembering difficult command lines! With three simple clicks on your mouse you will have a virtual disk mappingâ€¦Virtualization: everybody can do it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buit.org/2007/02/07/vmware-diskmount-utility-for-everyone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

