Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 16:17:16 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: chip <chip@wiegand.org> Cc: Anthony Atkielski <anthony@atkielski.com>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why dual boot? Message-ID: <3C53470C.8CEF3040@mindspring.com> References: <3C4FBE5C.2AE8C65@mindspring.com> <001b01c1a635$636a4170$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C5270E4.BF21F79B@mindspring.com> <200201260934538.SM01304@there>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
chip wrote: > There is another possibility not yet mentioned - vmware. I have set up > systems at work that run (spec'd by the developers) redhat linux and vmware > with win2000 in the vm. My experience was that this works real well. Both > OS's have full network access to each other and the 'outside' world. This > also saves the extra work of setting up a dual-boot system. Granted, > sometimes setting up vmware can be just as much work. Soon as I get a larger > hard drive I'm going to do that on my workstation, FBSD with W2K in the vm. The problem with dual booting is not the dual boot, according to anyone in the discussion so far (except for Anthony). The problem is with the repartitioning of the disk for the installation. The VMWare approach has this same problem, with getting to the point where you can even contemplate the install. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C53470C.8CEF3040>