Virtual Server and Virtual PC differences – today’s triva

Ben posted up an article a few days ago about the amount of Video Memory in the emulated S3 Trio graphics adapter under Virtual PC. His answer - 8MB. Obviously there are a number of differences between Virtual Server 2005 (R2) and Virtual PC 2004 in terms of emulated hardware, most of which are well documented (sound, SCSI etc). As a rule, I use Virtual Server 2005 for everything in my testing - very rare is it that I fire up Virtual PC. I've been asked in the past several times how much memory is supported by the S3 Trio adapter emulated under Virtual Server - the answer I give is 4MB (which it is). I've always assumed so far that it was the same between both environments without checking into this. As you can see, it isn't. However, in a production virtual server environment, 4MB is ample for most purposes obviously. One of those things to file for next time you're playing Virtual Trivial Persuit with your colleagues... or is that just me 😉

Comments (4)

  1. will says:

    Interesting, do you use virtual server for any production uses? When does that apply? Are resources impacted by using virtual pc?

  2. Hi Will. Not sure I understand quite what you’re asking. Personally, yes I use Virtual Server for production use, very heavily actually, to support my home infrastructure. We (Microsoft) also use Virtual Server in production – I posted up a blog entry a little while ago with some more details on that. It the question about resources and Virtual PC I wasn’t quite clear on. For production use, Virtual PC is not supported – test and development only. Obviously any Virtual Machine (regardless of Virtual Server vs Virtual PC) uses host resources – was there something specific you wanted clarifying?



  3. Rob Durkin says:

    I’m wondering, will the virtual PC-like component in Windows Vista (Enterprise) be supported for ‘production’ use? I mean, say you have an app that won’t run under Vista, so you create a WinXP VM, to run the legacy app. Will that situation be supported? Just curious. This virtualization wave we are going through raises some interesting questions…

  4. Rob – as I understand it, yes, this will be the case, but please bear in mind that no formal statement has been made that I have seen – this is my personal view and understanding of the landscape as I see it from within Microsoft. Virtualisation included in Windows Vista will be to ensure backwards compatability with applications which don’t run natively within Windows Vista itself, in the same way as for NT4 applications in Virtual PC running on a Windows XP host (albeit that NT4 support has now expired).

Skip to main content