Virtualizing the physical setup - Implementation, Products & !!! Aceeptance !!!

         Virtualization has always fascinated me, and have always wanted to take a big step with it. Virtualization marks its consideration for many reason few among them is ease in usage, configuration and deployment. My investment of 4 days on virtualization and products supporting and offering services was a real worth. I used major products of virtualization like VMware (player and workstation) , Windows Virtual PC and Sun Virtual Box. All these products haave some merits and demerits. For me to share my experience a better way and to scale the virtualization products, let’s consider a case.


Case:-

1. Setup of the virtual LAB environment, with operating systems ranging from Win XP 2000 to Win Vista and Solaris.
2. All the Machines can be run together and be on internet.
3. Setup can be managed via a single interface.
4. Setup can be reconfigured as per requirement easily and should be high in performance and less on resource consumption i.e. ease in changing networking type, size of the virtual disk, runtime additions etc.
5. No fresh installation of the Operating System, a virtual machine should be created from the host running(a replica of the host machine).
6. Usage of free to use features of the products and no cost involved, except, time.

Tools Used:-

1. Symantec Backup exec system recovery 8.5.
2. Microsoft Virtual PC 2007.
3. VMware Player 2.5.3 build-185404 and VMware Workstation.
4. Sun Virtual Box 3.0.8.

Creating the Virtual Machine from Host: -

       As per our requirement number of 5 mentioned above, I had to make the virtual machine of and from the host. To do this I preferred Symantec Backup exec, because it offers me lot of option and easy to use interface. The compatibility support of Symantec Backup Exec is very impressive.

        As per the requirement I considered only the primary partition of the Host machine to create a replica virtual machine. The first step is to create the One time Back of the Primary drive of the host operating system using the features of Symantec Backup exec:-

        Its pretty straight forward, just select the drive name the output file & the location to store, that’s it., time for coffee. The backup will take time as per the size of the disk. But Here is the best part Backup exec is very smart, the size of the backup file will be similar to the space consumed by information on the physical disk, but can keep record of the total size of the physical disk. The backup file will be saved as .sv2i config file and .v2i virtual hard disk and the best part one can directly run the .sv2i config file on VMware player so the task completes here.

         Only major limitation of the Symantec Backup exec during the above process is that it doesn't do the disk checking, if the physical disk has trouble so would the virtual hard disk. I would love to be wrong on this. Symantec Backup Exec is far superior product than Symantec Ghost, easy to use and nice management console all features and options are properly managed.

          But I had to opt for the better options as VMware take too much resources and tries to convert the .sv2i file into it readable format and most of the time it fails. Hard to guess who is the culprit. So once the backup file is up, let’s move ahead and use another cool feature of the Symantec Backup Exec system recovery which converts the backup file to virtual hard disk.

         The one time virtual conversion feature allows to make choice between VMware virtual hard disk and Microsoft Visual Hard disk. Just make the choice name the output file and location & wait for sweet creation of the virtual hard disk.

if VMware virtual disk is considered :-

         One can easily create the VMware machine using VMware workstation linked to the VMware hard disk and use the VMware player to run it. Both VMware workstation and VMware player is required as per our 6th requirement, not to shed any money & VMware workstation is paid software, but trial will do the business required.

if Microsoft Virtual Hard disk is considered:-

         Likewise VMware virtual disk create the same for Microsoft Virtual PC and configure virtual machine. One can easily configure the machine and run it with great ease. The Virtual hard disk can also be used with VMware player but it needs to be converted in accordance to its requirement but with no success guaranteed.

Sun Virtual Box :-

        The sun virtual box shows very good compatibility for Microsoft virtual hard disk formats & comparatively better performance. But the Sun virtual box supports only one primary hard disk on the management console so no matter how many virtual machine created it will be linked to only one bootable primary virtual hard disk. Can’t ask for better limitation.

          Once the Virtual machine is setup repeat the above method to create different virtual machine easily or else copy paste the machine incase required. Thus if there is a test setup of interacting and highly configured machines. The above process can easily create the required backup and create a virtual lab in less effort with high preserving. No information loss, no application configuration changed but all made virtual.

         Now let’s look at to the Virtual players and their feature which can help in deciding which virtual machine player and management application can be used to maintain the virtualized setups.



VMware Player and Workstation :-

       
         VMware applications and tools have been a disappointment for me when it comes to the performance of the virtual machines. The virtual machines were running slow on the VMware player, secondly VMware workstation was paid and I had to let if off. VMware installs lot information and tools on the host PC to give the virtualization feel, like separate virtual network adapter and device installations but none were able to give good network performance to the virtual machines, I had created. VMware is still a good choice when considered for ease of use and multiple virtual machine management.



Microsoft Virtual PC 2007:-

            Microsoft Virtual PC has most easy to use interface to setup and run the virtual machines. Multiple Virtual machines can be easily managed from a single console. But like the Host Microsoft PC trouble, if the network connection has hiccups so is the operating system. Microsoft Virtual PC doesn't installs the any virtual network adapters as a device along (that u see in network management window) to virtualize host network connections. The concern of performance can be overlooked up to some extent compared to the ease of use and management of many virtual machines.



Sun Virtual Box:-

         When it comes to the performance Sun Virtual box should be scored higher compared to it big competitors mentioned above. The Virtual machine performs well over network by impressive virtualization of the network adapter. The virtual resources management of Sun Virtual Box manages Microsoft Windows operating system better than the Microsoft Virtual PC 2007. But after all the goods, sun virtual Box allows only one primary virtual hard disk, so no matter how many virtual machine created they would be using the same virtual HD to boot i.e. better run one machine at a time. To make the situation worse to switch the machine u need to reload it or reconfigure it on the management console, why would someone should take so much of pain, when virtualization should make things easy ?


When acceptance is solution: -

       I need ease of Microsoft Virtual PC, performance of Sun Virtual Box and features of VMware. Currently I am considering Microsoft Virtual PC overall for its advantages minus performance hiccups.

WAVE iiiiiiinnnng on WEB

            Its alwasys interesting to see inovation coming and imparting a long term impression. Google Wave is one to be considered seriously. This application is a good conjuction of emails, IMs and documnet sharing, with  an impressive management console. I get the chance to have a look at well advertized Google's new thought.

Invitation or Trouble

           I filled an application with Google to have accounts for Google Wave, as and when it was possible. I applied for both developers and the general purpose account, but none got cleared. So Google's Wave should either be totally invitation based access or should be open to public for review completely, as its been weeks none of my request  were cleared from the Google yet. I managed a invite from a friend, but had another mumbo jumbo of Google. My friend had 8 invites and he sent invitations to few people, but none got cleared for over a week. He then finished his invitaion quota of 8 by referring more, and then it happened all the invitation got active and I got the account. I am not sure what to  call this a new method of sending the invitation wherein a invitee has to  finish  all the invitations at one go or should I call  it a miss on part of Google's thinking.  But atlast I got goin on Wave. I just  wanted to check what else can I wave when I can mail and chat anyways ?

Swimming in Sand

        Interface, look, feel and usability is good.  All the sections are managed in reserved spaces. If one has to promote Google APIs to others, show this example (WAVE), impressive. I got the nice and charming emails from Google, explaining what Google Wave is and how to get started. What I didnt get  from google is "Invitations" to forward and to make it worst I can't import my gmail  contacts to  wave to actually  use it. My contact list  has just  one man for weeks the one who send me the invitation. This is seriously unacceptable. If I can chat  with Google Wave as a part of waving then it has to be fully  integrated with  GTalk contacts, no matter my contacrts donn have Wave Ids. So whazz the strategy Google ? Why would I hold two  different account for the same thing? especially  when all the other google applications are integrated like Blogspot, youtube , Gmail, Gtalk.... I donn see a convincing reason here.  I am waving with my self right now.

          The Google wave is advertized as an  product with lot of meaning and everything is called waving, all because of the features. But my analysis says its a good integration of Gmail and Gtalk with features made more adavced by allowing live video sharing, so  called real time typing etc. Its  nice product to try (Anyway I have tendency  to  try  anything that  comes form Microsoft, Google and Apple).

Gambling or Waving

        I tried to  use some of the feautres of google wave with my only contact in the wave list, this is what I get for the time I invested.

         One can ping contact its just  like Gtalk or chat  on Gmail, just made fancier with the real time feture where in one can see what  other is typing before he sends it. But the look makes it cumbersome. Instead of color symbol delimitation the look should be segmented to identify what is my area of typing and what is the recipient's text editing area.  Now one cool feature, where in I can edit the typo of the other contact while he is typing, amazed me, how is it usefull ? Its good when you use to share a statement with other to seek his\her\their correction, thats it, this feature can be seriously be of some fun with young college going friends who can use  it to frame confession from others, "a written record".  Now the ping window which opens takes its space over the main window it can only be minimized like in Gmail, difference is in Gmail it sits at bottom whereas in Wave its at top, and eats space. You can't re-organize them at your will. So  a poor integration of Chat interface than what you get from Gtalk, Live messenger and Y! meessenger. Google API is effective, and Its yours, for consumer's sake Google use it properly  please.
    
              Then on Google wave Interface seriously gets complicated when one tries to manage information sharing with  more than 5-6 contacts simultaneously. Three frames on the interface are space eaters which stays there even when you donn want it. things minimizes maximizes, everithing looks similar, hard to  distinquish  sometimes where am i working at. Google needs to develop a "help  me find me" part on Google wave, to allow users not to  get  lost  in his own world,  or atleast provide button named "911". Re-ordering of the frames is required, as work area has enough space and repeating things can be replcaed or -re-organized.

             Good thing about google wave is how effectively  one share a document, video or a complete wave on another wave i.e. moving information from one place to other. Never seen an  application who can make sharing so  easy and effective on live environment. Nice integration of Google Map with Google wave.            

Is it just about waving ? (Dr. Dang thought)

           On the first Look Google Wave is more or less looks like a college project made online in hurry. But why hurry? Is Google loosing its way while trying to be competetive with Microsoft? We need Google to keep  check on Microsoft. But Google Wave shows how ugly  the spirit  of competition can go.

            Google answers the question here
http://www.google.com/support/wave/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=162237 . States things will go on as and when system can hadle it. Not an acceptable answer from "Search Giant" , donn the Google has infra ? or donn the Google know how many active users it has on Gmail and Gtalk? Releasing a Beta or preview of an application spcially  from brands like Google, Apple , Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle etc. goes on craze, excuse of "system capability" is unacceptable, be a leader when you you want to be.

             Google took the war  with microsoft on new front, the WEB. Google knows it can't crack Microsoft in desktop applications and Operating system. Google is creating alternatives of Mcrosoft technologies on web, forcing Microsoft to  go  on web with Office etc. So its not just  about Google and Microsoft  now, end user has to  make a choice between web and desktop. Technologies on both the fronts are immature, tough time for end user as two mighty gorillas are advocating two  different roads (Only time has answer, by then ask GOD, if he even knows). Its like being trapped in hot spot of a war zone, bullets flying everywhere and you just don't know which way to run.

              Google did made a desperate attempt with Chrome browsers (I welcome it, Microsoft needs competition on IE), but failed to  mark impression. Google tried one more time by providing the addon for IE to enable HTML5, a good attempt to  penetrate the Microsoft's IE market, but Wave is not the application to begin the competition, making it easier for others to accept the disregard shown by Microsoft. Google's another mistake is promoting the plugin which  modifies the security  setting and thus exposing the PC to  vulnerabilities.
           
            Google gets its due consideration everytime, but has to start living upto expectations. Google's Wave is a good thought process, but application available will dent the image of Google. Google Wave will only wary end user about its hyped OS project, Hope Google wave in its current state is not linked with the OS project.

          I started on good note when I heard about the Wave methodologies, then I looked at  the offered product, either improve the Google Wave sooner or murder me for my trust. Google should not ignore this baby, it has promise to deliver.