Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

Lionel_Menchaca — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 19:06:26 GMT

All:

My bad for not closing the loop on this thread. We released on updated XPS 700 BIOS that enables Intel's Virtualization Technology and also

Here's the post that communicates those details.

Again, my apologies for not closing the loop.

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

John O. — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 05:55:31 GMT

So... any word yet on why there is no virtualization support on the XPS700, or what if anything will be done about it? Is Dell under the mistaken impression that high-end "consumer/enthusiast" machines are only for gamers (or that gamers couldn't possibly be interested in virtualization or other "esoteric" hardware features -- those same gamers who've been at the bleeding edge in overclocking and other hardware tweaking?)

If the hardware (CPU, motherboard, chipset) support the feature and it's just a BIOS issue, Dell needs to update the BIOS to allow its customers to turn it on. (Go ahead and make the default state be "disabled" if you feel it's necessary, but please let us change the setting.) If the issue is more complex than that, please explain -- I think you owe that much to customers who spent significant $$$ on a high-end PC with an incomplete feature set.

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

romills — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:38:38 GMT

elKeeed,

Which person seems to think that VM/VT will make their machine twice as powerful? Why do you seem to think you are much more knowledgable on this then the other people who post here? Have you done background checks on all the posters?

Yes, the condescending manner in your post rubs me the wrong way, its not clear if you were implying my post or the one above, but that doesn't matter, I found your post very condescending either way. If you know alot about virtualization, you could be more informative without copping a know it all attitude. While most people may not be aware of what virtualization is, you will find that the population reading these posts likely have a better comprehension of VM than the general population.

Personally, I would not use an active server as a game machine (can you say Lag), hence why I have my old machine as a linux server. Eventually my XPS will replace that box and I will purchase (or build) a new gaming box. This is one of the main reasons I ordered Raid 1 over Raid 0 on my machine. This machine will eventually become a file and application server.

It will be a long time before any games or desktop applications take advantage of any VM-like features. If games or application ever do take advantage of virtualization, it would likely require the hosting OS to support this, and it would likely be for system stability versus performance. The only actual performance improvements would be in the overhead improvement from the HW versus SW virtualization, and not by direct algorithm efficiencies in the game engine. Feel free to correct me where I am wrong on this.

If you are aware of benchmarks on Core2 VM support versus SW, please post a link, I would love to read it.

My beef with this is that Dell made no mention that this was not supported out of the box, they either need to fix this or fix their marketing so it's clear what is and is not supported. If I had build my own box, it would of been there.

For those that don't know, the primary advantage (at least to me) of Virtualization is to eliminate multiple physical servers, while still having the stability of unique servers (HW failures not included). You can restart an virtual server without taking down the other OS's on that server.

Regards,

romills

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

ElKeeed — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 12:59:07 GMT

I think the whole 1 app per VM idea is in error. The OS should have a better security model so that apps can run without being interfered with rather than move to highly inefficient and restrictive VM model. Perhaps a per app permission system would be good to still allow addons to function. VM interest is great news for Microsoft, why spend time and money making the OS work properly when you can encourage VM and sell Windows 4 or 5 times over for 1 physical machine?

Also I am regularly amused by folks like in the above comments who seem to think that VM will make their machine twice as powerful. The guy who wants to run a dedicated server as well as the game on a single machine seems to miss the whole point of a dedicated server and why all these people are complaining about not having VT support when I doubt half of them will know the difference. To me it seems that VM technology is being pushed by salesmen and noobs in a direction that is full of buzzwords and hype rather than technically great.

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

MDrechsler — Sun, 01 Oct 2006 09:43:52 GMT

I have the XPS600 With 950 Pentium D. http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium_d/prodbrief.pdf

Another example of a recent dell model that supports a CPU with VT features but does not allow you to enable it in the BIOS.

A good example of this: http://www.vmware.com/community/message.jspa?messageID=455333

My own personal experience is with the Parallels Workstation product. It reports that the VT feature is disabled on my machine. (they call it hardware virtualization support on the VM flags settings screen)

So anyhow. I'm asking the powers that be to roll this support into a (soon to be released?) bios update.

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

romills — Tue, 19 Sep 2006 04:53:41 GMT

Quakegod

For some reason my first response didn't get posted.. so I'll try again.

It should not matter if VT may not enhance games. I didn't buy this computer only for games. Games will be played on my pc for sure, but I also plan to use it to run VMWARE, and likely use it to replace my linux server in the future.

Vista is supposed to also take advantage of VT to help it run better. VT will not just be for VMWARE, and will likely be used to help any OS designed for it in the future. I did buy this machine thinking I could use it in the future..

I hope Dell get's it's act together. (right now I am considerably less than impressed)

As far as 410 supporting VT, look up the online user manual, it's located in there someplace. It was mentioned in Dell's Customer forums a couple days ago, I don't know the exact page, but it is in the BIOS / Performace settings.

Romills

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

Dell Lied — Mon, 18 Sep 2006 16:08:23 GMT

QuakeGod,

Virtualization may be a great benefit to gamers as game developers learn to take advantage of it.

There are game genres which emulate hacking/cracking, and with virtualization, they can advance to a whole new level. You could actually hack into a second OS running simultaneously on your system, chock full of hidden gems as a part of the game.

Also, gamers can benefit from virtualization by running a dedicated multiplayer server in one VM, while joining in on the game in another, without loss of framerate or requiring a second physical machine.

Virtualization can also benefit gamers as developers learn to customize the base OS they want to use. Which means a leaner, more efficient base for their games to run on, without uneccessary processes running to reduce game performance. Also, it can reduce the time some gamers spend in teaking their OS for better performance, as the VM image will have already been tweaked by the developers.

Think virtualization is still something gamers wouldn't want?

-DL

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

QuakeGod — Fri, 15 Sep 2006 22:50:13 GMT

romills,

Where did you find that the XPS 410 supports Virtualization? The CPU supports it, but I couldn't find anything that said the system supports it.

Like the post says, this is mainly a server technology and the new CPU's are supporting it natively and so eventually it will get to the desktop but from what I understand about it, I sure don't want multiple copies of Windows running at the same time I'm in a frag fest.

I can't see gamers needing it or even wanting it beyond something new to play with.

I can see it on a workstation, but not much use on a home or gaming desktop.

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

romills — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:23:16 GMT

Lionel,

Can you also get an explanation on why the XPS 410 is able to support VT, but it is not planned for the XPS 700. I realize they are different motherboard and chipsets, but I would think that your high end PC would have a fuller feature set than your middle line.

Thanks...

(Also, why can't Dell interact on the User Forums, other than just the moderator. This would be a better way to answer some of these questions.)

re: Virtualization Beyond the Enterprise

Lionel_Menchaca — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 05:09:22 GMT

Tom, I Jones, Pointgard and romill: Sorry for the delay... Am on the road right now, but I'll ask about VT on the XPS 700 and will let you know when I have some information.