A word about uploading VM images

edited April 2017 in Software
I've noticed a few people uploading virtual machine images recently. While we do have a few VM file downloads, we really don't need more VMs.

The problem with VMs is that there are infinite configuration possibilities. Some may want a fresh clean install, while others want all updates installed and piles of applications pre-loaded, and multiply that by workstation/server/enhanced releases and a hundred different languages and the number of possibilities are endless.

VMs are huge and take up space and bandwidth. Any posted VMs image configurations need to be carefully considered.

There is also the issue that we would have to check through every file to make sure the uploader hasn't hidden a virus or something.

Another issue with VMs is that they can become obsolete. Despite the promise of installing once and migrating to new host OSes and VM versions forever, guest compatiblity can change. VM software vendors may drop support for guest OSes or break compatibility, rendering a VM image useless without patching.

In general it is better to download installation media and install it to your own preferences. Yes that may mean some clicking and waiting, but that is how it was done. As a reminder, we do welcome how-tos and tutorials.

If anyone REALLY thinks a new or updated VM image is needed here, please create a thread in the software forum and discuss it. If enough regular members here come to a consensus that a particular VM configuration would be beneficial to the community we might consider it.

Otherwise, please don't waste your time uploading random VM images.

Comments

  • I think VM image is Not necessary to upload on WinWorld.

    The reason VM image is for VMware, not for standard disk/disc image compatible with another PC related emulator.
  • I think every VM should be packed into a OVF file, which is not hardware-specific and isn't tied to any hypervisor.
  • edited April 2017
    ibmpc5150 wrote:
    I think VM image is Not necessary to upload on WinWorld.

    The reason VM image is for VMware, not for standard disk/disc image compatible with another PC related emulator.


    well... that's not really an educated assumption because you can easily use VMWare Images in VirtualBox, and say for example you just so happen to have 7-ZIP installed, you can use that to actually extract the vhd contents onto a physical drive. all you gotta do is select the VHD file (I have not tested if VDI or VMDX images work, only VHD) and where it says "open" in the ribbon in windows 7 and up, click the little drop down arrow and either "Choose Program" and them choose "7-ZIP File Manager". then you can just click and drag onto the drive you want to copy to. there are how-tos online (maybe even on this forum. if not, i'll post one.).
  • IMHO, I think having VMs here is a waste of space better allocated to storing more applications and so forth.
    I think it's more worthwhile having tutorials with a dedicated space for the drivers for each OS for the relevant hypervisor. In addition to that, potentially have a matrix detailing each OS and advising compatibility between hypervisors and their versions.

    Example for argument sake:

    | VirtualBox | VMWare Player | VMWare Fusion | PCem |
    Windows 3.0 | o | o | ~ | o |
    Windows 95 | o | o | o | x |
    OS/2 2.1 | x | o | ~ | o |

    o = Fully Compatible, works at optimal performance with hypervisor's guest additionals/tools fully compatible
    ~ = Some compatiblity, i.e. optimal video, no sound
    x = Nonfunctional, either problematic to install, or installs with no driver support
  • Some people even use these images on real hardware. VM Images do no good for that.
  • PCAT wrote:
    Some people even use these images on real hardware. VM Images do no good for that.

    well like i've said before, you can use 7-zip to extract vhd files to an actual hard drive, making it usable on real hardware...
Sign In or Register to comment.