Extensions for non-XP VMs in Win7

On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:29:01 -0500, Robert Comer
<bobcomer-removeme-@mindspring.com> wrote:

>>I'll take your word for it for now. I'm not up to potentially
>>blue-screening my system right now. ;-)
>
>No crash here, starting VMWare VM first or last. And you can run a
>64-bit guest with a WVPC running. Curious, I wonder how they do it.

Good to know, must have been one of the updates. Are you running Wks
7.0.1?

--
Cheers,
Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
http://vpc.essjae.com/
http://smudj.wordpress.com/

In message <> Robert Comer
<bobcomer-removeme-@mindspring.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>>WVPC brings a few things to the table, application virtualization mode
>>being a prime example (VMWare has similar, called "Unity" but it's
>>painfully slow)
>
>They have to rethink Unity, it's not very useful as is. Unity can't
>really be compared to XP Mode, they tried to cram too much into Unity
>making it more confusing to run and slower performance-wise.

Cram too much into it?

Unity's problem is the way it detects and draws windows, it's using a
VNC-of-1999 type approach of reading parts of virtual video memory vs
WVPC which uses RDP.

More annoyingly, VMWare has some quirks capturing and releasing the
mouse/keyboard.

However, given that VMWare tries to support multiple guest OSes on
multiple types of hosts, they're somewhat limited in their approach.

>Good to know, must have been one of the updates. Are you running Wks
>7.0.1?

Yep, I updated to that before I tested this scenario.

--
Bob Comer


On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:45:55 -0800, "Steve Jain [MVP]"
<noreply.-@-.essjae.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:29:01 -0500, Robert Comer
><bobcomer-removeme-@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>>I'll take your word for it for now. I'm not up to potentially
>>>blue-screening my system right now. ;-)
>>
>>No crash here, starting VMWare VM first or last. And you can run a
>>64-bit guest with a WVPC running. Curious, I wonder how they do it.
>
>Good to know, must have been one of the updates. Are you running Wks
>7.0.1?

>Cram too much into it?

That's my impression, yes.

>Unity's problem is the way it detects and draws windows, it's using a
>VNC-of-1999 type approach of reading parts of virtual video memory vs
>WVPC which uses RDP.

That would certainly slow things down in Unity, but it's slow from
more than that, it's sharing more than just the app window.

It's true I haven't run it much, it was one of the things I didn't
like so haven't played with it a lot. VMWare Fusion has Unity also
and I've probably played with that more than Unity on the PC, but it's
not real good there either.

>More annoyingly, VMWare has some quirks capturing and releasing the
>mouse/keyboard.

I really haven't noticed that lately.

>However, given that VMWare tries to support multiple guest OSes on
>multiple types of hosts, they're somewhat limited in their approach.

Very true.

--
Bob Comer


On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:25:31 -0800, Dave Warren
<dave-> wrote:

>In message <> Robert Comer
><bobcomer-removeme-@mindspring.com> was claimed to have wrote:
>
>>>WVPC brings a few things to the table, application virtualization mode
>>>being a prime example (VMWare has similar, called "Unity" but it's
>>>painfully slow)
>>
>>They have to rethink Unity, it's not very useful as is. Unity can't
>>really be compared to XP Mode, they tried to cram too much into Unity
>>making it more confusing to run and slower performance-wise.
>
>Cram too much into it?
>
>Unity's problem is the way it detects and draws windows, it's using a
>VNC-of-1999 type approach of reading parts of virtual video memory vs
>WVPC which uses RDP.
>
>More annoyingly, VMWare has some quirks capturing and releasing the
>mouse/keyboard.
>
>However, given that VMWare tries to support multiple guest OSes on
>multiple types of hosts, they're somewhat limited in their approach.

Robert Comer wrote:
>> Cram too much into it?
>
> That's my impression, yes.
>
>> Unity's problem is the way it detects and draws windows, it's using a
>> VNC-of-1999 type approach of reading parts of virtual video memory vs
>> WVPC which uses RDP.

On a (slightly) related note, do you find in general that VMWare virtual
machines run better under Remote Desktop than under VMWare Workstation itself?

--
David Wilkinson
Visual C++ MVP

>On a (slightly) related note, do you find in general that VMWare virtual
>machines run better under Remote Desktop than under VMWare Workstation itself?

I haven't used a VMWare VM with RDP in a long time -- I mainly only
run Linux in VMWare, so that's not an option. Have you noticed a
difference?

--
Bob Comer


On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:06:40 -0500, David Wilkinson
<no-> wrote:

>Robert Comer wrote:
>>> Cram too much into it?
>>
>> That's my impression, yes.
>>
>>> Unity's problem is the way it detects and draws windows, it's using a
>>> VNC-of-1999 type approach of reading parts of virtual video memory vs
>>> WVPC which uses RDP.
>
>On a (slightly) related note, do you find in general that VMWare virtual
>machines run better under Remote Desktop than under VMWare Workstation itself?

In message <> David Wilkinson
<no-> was claimed to have wrote:

>Robert Comer wrote:
>>> Cram too much into it?
>>
>> That's my impression, yes.
>>
>>> Unity's problem is the way it detects and draws windows, it's using a
>>> VNC-of-1999 type approach of reading parts of virtual video memory vs
>>> WVPC which uses RDP.
>
>On a (slightly) related note, do you find in general that VMWare virtual
>machines run better under Remote Desktop than under VMWare Workstation itself?

I noticed this in the 6.x era, but not in Workstation 6.5/7.0, with the
possible exception of disabling options in the "Experience" tab of MSTSC
(in which case you should look for similar options in the VM itself)