No, I'm not going to use it on server hardware. I'm learning and will be using it on a laptop. I will give a try to virtualbox. Still, what VMware product is everybody is talking about for a laptop/destop? I've got lost in their terminology and countless products.

I am aiming to write a free boot camp for RHCSA and later RHCE. In initial module I am writing about setting up a personal practice single pc and multiple networked pc virtual lab using VirtualBox and ESXi Hypervisor.

@Mustafa^Qasim

How is that useful to the original poster? He just wants to try Linux in Windows.

Mustafa^Qasim, please take your spam elsewhere.

I need a help on VWmware product selection for running two Linuxes on desktop/laptop for learning purposes

Why not VirtualBox? It seems much less confusing (at least from looking at the websites, I have never used VMware), plus you can download it for free.

1. Go to this page: http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads, and download "VirtualBox X.X.X for Windows hosts".
2. Then download the ISO image of the Linux distro you want.
3. Open VirtualBox and set up a new machine. It guides you through the process, it should be easy to figure out.
4. Set your new virtual machine's CD/DVD drive to the ISO image you downloaded (you don't need to burn a physical disc).
5. Start the virtual machine and begin using Linux!

1 members found this post helpful.

Linux is really just a small part of a "Linux Distribution". These complete operating system bundles called "Linux distros" are better described as a Linux kernel with software and programs to make a complete system. So, the "Linux" part of them is mostly the same. What varies greatly is how the system is configured, started and updated as well as the included programs.

To go with the car analogy, they all have the same Linux engine design, with different cars built around that engine.

What do you want from your Linux based operating system?

Do you want to learn about configuring and installing Linux?
Do you want everything done automatically without having to know much about it?
Do you want the system to mostly stay unchanged and do manual updates yourself?
Do you want the system to automatically update itself with the latest fixes?
Do you want only proven, stable software, or do you want the new (even beta) features?
Will you write or develop software on the system?
Do you want to play games?
Do you want to run or emulate other operating systems on top of Linux?
Is your computer an old, limited machine or a very new fast machine?

My "short list" of Linux distributions to illustrate some of these differences is, Slackware, Ubuntu and Puppy. You can add DEBIAN, FEDORA and MINT if you want a more comprehensive list.

Slackware is good if you want to learn a little about Linux but not build the whole thing from scratch. It does not use GNOME, and uses KDE, XFCE or other GUI environments. KDE is very similar in feel to Windows. You can add GNOME to Slackware if you want that.

Ubuntu is good if you just want to install something without having to know a whole lot about it. It uses GNOME for a GUI and feels a bit different than Windows. GNOME is leaner than KDE so it works better than KDE on older hardware. Ubuntu doesn't always install and run easily, so you can still end up having to learn about Linux or work around problems.

Puppy is a great tiny Linux system that you can boot from a CD or thumb drive. It is easy to configure and designed to save your work when you'll run it on multiple computers. Puppy is invaluable for having an OS to boot on computers when Windows or some other OS has gotten itself crippled. Keep a Puppy boot CD around and learn how to use the basics of Puppy.

People will debate passionately about what Linux distros are best. There are many very good distros. What's best will depend on what you want from the operating system and what hardware you have in the computer. I think that Ubuntu and Mint are good starting choices for exploration. Slackware is a good starting choice for those interested in learning more about Linux or who want better control of how the system is installed and configured.

1 members found this post helpful.

I believe that's what I am writing about .... weird .. leave

well, if you are interested in VMware then buy the Vmware Workstation or do use the crack editions available as you wish. If you've a VMware appliance already then you can use the free Vmware Player Just tune the network adapters setting into a host only or bridge or internal network settings to form a networked lab of VMs.

Do you need detailed guidance on how to install multiple Linux/Unix/Windows VMs and network them with each other an other machines on your network?

http://www.cx7solutions.com/showmpar...ation,inst_rh3
http://www.linwik.com/wiki/running+l...re+workstation

1 members found this post helpful.

Hi kienlarsen,

If you are planning to install it on Windows machine then go with the following link:

http://www.vmware.com/products/works.../overview.html

If you are trying to get it on a linux machine then you can go with VMware server:

http://www.vmware.com/products/server/overview.html

I have personally used VMware on both Redhat and Novell SuSE and it works pretty well and get configured easily but when it comes to Ubuntu 10.4 or greater it creates a lot of problem. Same with Linux Mint 10 :-( . However, I have heard that VMware server works fine with Ubuntu 9 and Linux Mint 8.

1 members found this post helpful.

kienlarsen, I want you to read this (I'm just pointing it out because there are starting to be a lot of posts in front of it, plus it's on a previous page):

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...2/#post4338244

I use Slackware since ten years. Before Slackware I used for a few years Red Hat and Mandrake (former brand of Mandriva). While using Slackware I tried in the meantime at least Gentoo, Debian, Ubuntu, FreeBSD, Fedora, openSuSE, Mint and Arch. I tried them for a few weeks, a few days or a few hours. I really hate some of them and I like less or more the others. None of them surpassed Slackware in my opinion. In a few cases I wasn’t able to do anything. In most cases I wasn’t able to arrange things as I do in Slackware. The closest to Slackware is in my opinion Arch so it’s my second choice distribution. On the other hand the simplest one distribution is in my opinion Mint. So I recommend it to anybody who asks me which distribution will be the best for he or she.

As you can see the choices of someone who knows exactly what he or she wants are limited to just one distribution regardless of the abundance of the Linux distributions. In my case that choice has the name Slackware.

As for X Window desktop environments and window managers I agree KDE and GNOME are sluggish and boring. Fortunately there are the other window managers such as: Blackbox, Fluxbox, FVWM, twm, Window Maker and a lot of the others. Most of them allow to customize their look and feel in such a profound way that it’s difficult to recognize them. If you’re interested in that subject visit that thread: This is my Slackware desktop...

w1k0

I guess Slackware is little too adventurous for my goal of learning mainstream Linux distro. I believe it is fun and engaging, but as of today I have more defined goals. Thanks anyway I enjoyed reading your post. I wish I would have more time for discoveries.


MTK358, Terminator, Mustafa, Erik all guys: thanks for vminfor and vitualbox guidance! I really appreciate it. It will take me few days I guess of trial/error before I reach the next stop.

kienlarsen,

My point wasn’t to encourage you to use Slackware but to show the simple rule: the deeper someone went into some Linux distribution the less alternatives he or she has. I described that on my example. In my case that distribution of choice is Slackware. I discovered it after three years of using the other distributions and I stayed with it forever. In your case it can be any other distribution. Start with something that seems suitable to your needs. After gaining some knowledge you’d refine your choice. I’m glad I enjoyed you with my post.

It may be funny, but once upon a time, many years ago, I had a part time job in public library (I was NT admin fresh right from a high school, back then), and library received some "rare to find" CD subscriptions and there was Slackware distro among them. And I remember I was experimenting with it a little. I can't even remember how it was. It happened even before Internet became omnipresent.

I agree that Mint is a very friendly Linux distro that is easy to install and use.

Linux in a virtual machine is a good way to learn about Linux. The only major drawback to a virtual machine is the lack of 3G graphics support in free virtual machine software. For example, I can make World Of Warcraft work reasonably well in Linux, but not if Linux runs in a virtual machine. If one wants all the 3D eye candy of GNOME or KDE then a virtual machine won't provide the needed graphics support. However, simpler window managers like XFCE4 run just as well in a virtual machine with all of their normal graphic effects like translucent windows.

I'm trying to be good and not over-emphasize Slackware. That's also my preferred distro. Slackware really isn't more complicated to install than any other distro.

The one that I had the most trouble with was GENTOO, simply because of the number of steps required to install all the pieces. I don't remember why I couldn't install using the release CD but I had to resort to manually installing GENTOO and then was unsuccessful. That was partly due to documentation issues.

That's interesting! I've been under impression that virtual machine does not affect functionality. I've been thinking of it as of method of passing data down the pipe. Does it mean that properly set Linux for virtual solution needs to be recompiled in order to have "virtual drivers" (my terminology)? It is very possible that I don't know what I'm talking about, but in last 3 nights I've been studying a lot and I feel smart . Am I right, or I'm thinking in a wrong direction?