On 10/2/07, Gerhard Fiedler <lists@connectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> Ariel Rocholl wrote:
>
> >> VMserver is downloaded (but not installed yet). I expected to see
> >> something about making your own VMs up front, but it was buried in the
> >> FAQ. The first pages all say download and get a packaged VM to run
> >> with. But, it should work.
> >>
> >> Now, are there any comments on whether to install Linux (presumably
> >> Ubuntu) THEN win 2k pro, or win 2k pro first, then Linux?
>
> > I'd say Windows then Linux, without a doubt. Reason is Linux is well
> > prepared and documented to install after Windows, but the opposite is not
> > true (yet).

This is recommended for dual-boot. For VMWare, this does not apply.

> I've never had a problem installing Windows into a VM. I don't know what
> kind of documentation you want... Create a virtual disk, start the VM, and
> install Windows.

So I guess if the OP want to go the VMware way (I still prefer dual boot
or multi-boot), the question is to use Linux as the host OS or use
Windows as the host OS.

To me if the OP use Windows as a host OS, he will mostly stick to Windows
as it works for him. Linux will be sidelined. Just my observation. I've seen
people install Linux VM inside a Windows machine and it will be just a
toy for them since they still find it easier to run the native Windows
session.

So for convenience, he can install Linux as a VM on top of Windows,
risking of never really use Linux.

On the other hand, if he install Linux and run Windows as a VM,
he might get used to Linux and only run Windows for those
applications he needs under Windows. I believe some experienced
Linux users in PIClist go this route.

Xiaofan
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist