Click Here for YouTube video of 25 different OSes running simultaneously on an Apple iMac!
Posted on 07/31/2015 10:36:47 PM PDT by Swordmaker
Think running two operating systems at the same time is clever? How about twenty-five?
Hypervisors or virtual machine monitors (VMM) are computer software, firmware or hardware that create and runs virtual machines.
While this demo has no practical purpose, it does help to illustrate how clean and efficient are VMware’s hypervisors.
Of course, VMWare makes one of the most widely-used software hypervisors for the Mac, Fusion Pro 7.
Ping to dayglored and Shadow Ace for your lists. . .
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
Of course, I have a practical purpose for running seven OSes on my Mac. . . providing service to my clients. I seldom run them simultaneously, but i have. I have been challenged on my assertion before, but this graphically demonstrates that challenge was just wrong. It is entirely possible and reasonable to do on a Mac. I know of developers who do it regularly.
One of the best commercials ever...except 99.9% of the population wouldn’t understand a word of it. Thanks for posting.
But is it possible to run OS 9 anymore in an OS X window? Or is that kaput?
I have VMs of:
What else are these things used for?
VMware (Fusion on a Mac) is great stuff.
I'll also note in passing that Mac hardware is one of the best (fastest, stablest) platforms for running Windows native (on the metal). This is generally done using the Apple "BootCamp" dual-boot option.
Good point, if he had included Sun's^H^H^H^H^HOracle's Solaris 11 among those virtualized platforms, it would have been far more approachable for the masses. :)
I wonder how much memory that guy has in his demo machine.
Hmmmmmm. . . good question. I think I saw him running OS X.5 in a VM on that OS X.11 El Capitan. OS X.5 can still run Rosetta, the virtual machine that will run MacOS 9.2.2 in an OS X Window, so I think the answer would be yes, it can!
LOL! Great! I wonder what the performance hit would be compared to an old OS 9 machine. Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if there were none, these days.
Sigh. . . This again. . . Programers. . . developers . . . engineers. . . scientists. . . use Macs.
How many times does it take before you crippled Windows users get it through your heads that Macs are NOT toys??? They are fully functional and quite powerful UNIX™ workstations.
I recently retired as a Sr. Network Engineer for one of the larger cities in Florida. I built their virtual environment based on VMware's Vsphere. The last cluster I built consisted of five servers with half a TeraByte of RAM each. The cluster could easily run 400 virtual servers in a production environment with enough resources to spare to take a physical server out of the cluster for maintenance. VMware Vsphere is awesome.
Define “running” in this case. 25 VMs “running” at idle is nothing. The Vt-D in any platform could handle 25/50 threads without breaking a sweat. How about RAM allocation per VM? Number of cores per VM? What integration technologies are configured (e.g. clock synchronization, clipboard redirection)?
VMware’s guidance for most VM hosts running ESX 5.5 is 25-30 guests per host depending on load. High IO with products such as databases or graphical applications cut those numbers in half. In most cases, we’re talking about hosts with over 64 GB RAM and usually two or more quad-core or better processors.
We run Cisco UCS hardware in our shop, and our hosts have four hex-core processors, 192 GB RAM, and at least four FC backchannels for storage to EMC hardware. We run an average of 30 guests per host. If every one of those guests ramped up to 50% or better on CPU, every channel on that system would be swamped. You’d see CPU cache latency in the 3-5 second range, which is an eternity in computing.
I have a lot of respect for Apple and their hardware, but to make it seem like running 25 VMs on a consumer-grade platform is impressive, they’re being disingenuous unless you give us more than just a number.
I have over 50 VMs configured in my home lab which runs on three different Intel-based platforms, but they’re not all turned on at the same time.
*Sigh*
How many of those Apple laptops are running WINDOWS Parallels desktops? Many of my engineers run on MacBooks, but every single one of them is using Parallels with Windows 8.1 or 10. I'm the enterprise architect, and my boss and I are the only two people in the department using Dell workstations with VDI passthrough and Surface Pro 3 tablets to access our systems when we're not at our desks.
You can point out these pictures EVERYWHERE. The fact is that any company wanting to save their money will be using Wintel-based platforms. Apple devices are expensive terminals in most engineering shops.
BFD , seriously... how lousy does PC software have to be that this is news ... I had a IBM 4341 running CMS VM 35 years ago with 7 production systems on it and it had 1mb of memory and sub 1 second response times...and in 1991 NASA consolidated a dozen legacy 1950’s/60’s/70’s/80’s computer systems that couldn’t previously communicate (all kinds of has-been vendors that were LONG out of business) onto a single 3090-200 running VM in the VAB located datacenter.
Just getting 25 OS’s loaded and being able to switch between them is NOT impressive. Try putting 500-1000 users on each image, or even just 50 since it’s a pc. Notify me when pc coders get to that level of tightness in their code.
They make good workstations. They're toys when you try to make servers out of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.