IT Professionals

Virtual Server 2005 R2 To Support Linux

Posted by on Aug 29, 2005 | 10 Comments

Mary Jo Foley at Microsoft Watch writes:

…They had decided to christen the first service pack (SP) update for Microsoft’s Virtual Server 2005 product as an R2 release…

Virtual Server, which is based on technology Microsoft acquired from Connectix Corp. in 2003, allows customers to run multiple operating systems, including Linux and Unix, concurrently on a single x86 hardware server.

Microsoft officials have talked up plans for Virtual Server 2005 SP1 for months. The primary enhancements were the addition of x64-based system support and support for Linux as a guest operating system. Microsoft released a first SP1 beta in April.”

[Continue reading Microsoft Redraws Its Virtual Server Roadmap]

  • Fodr Kreatr

    As if we didn’t think social networking could make the world any dumber, along comes this P.o.S. When will people realise real life is already a game and as Chris himself said ‘If you’re not paying for it you’re the product being sold’. What is this grotesque contraption but the pinnacle in lunacy of our day, that people are willing to dedicate their very lives to such vanity. If you spend your life long enough in a dream it will take hold as reality and reality will take hold as a dream. If this atrocity goes live, it could well send the world down the pan – not neccessarily a bad thing mind you…

  • http://www.anthonyguidetti.com Anthony Guidetti

    It’s my opinion that I want followers to like my content for them to follow me. I would rather have less followers who care about what I have to say that a million who don’t.

    • http://chris.pirillo.com/ Chris Pirillo

      That’s a good opinion. :)

      • http://www.anthonyguidetti.com Anthony Guidetti

        Even though it is pretty obvious to most, my cousin thinks it’s all about numbers. He looks at me crazy every time I tell him he should build up a real audience.

        • http://chris.pirillo.com/ Chris Pirillo

          You should really be looking at the number of lists a Twitter account is included within. That’s a far better metric than eleventy bajillion spammers.

    • http://www.evolve-pr.com Tom Ohle

      And that’s exactly our point on Empire Avenue :) . You can have a high share price by being engaged with a small number of followers; we’re trying to build a platform that will provide some SM metrics and new ways to engage for existing social media fanatics… but also to introduce the everyman (or everywoman) to social media. Lots of users have commented about how it’s encouraged them to go create a Twitter account (or actually use it), to finally start that blog they’ve wanted to make, etc.

      Sure, the buy/sell thing could be potentially off-putting, but the mechanics — at least this is our aim — encourage you to engage people across the social web. All about meeting new people who share your interests and establishing a “value” based relationship with them.

      • http://chris.pirillo.com/ Chris Pirillo

        Did you just spam?

        • http://www.evolve-pr.com Tom Ohle

          Did I? If I did, accept my apologies and confine my comment to the bottomless pits. Just trying to clarify the point of the site :) .

  • Ozmodai

    It’s a game and it’s not even a very fun one. Being at the top of some sort of Internet pile doesn’t earn many bragging rights outside of that pile. The social aspects are faked just to raise the score.
    I’m about to go raise my score by spamming! Bye!

  • http://www.WhatDidEricSay.com Eric Miltsch

    The “game” element is fun. The ultimate goal for the company behind it is obviously the “in-game” sales/upgrades available – buying more “eaves.”

    Spend real money to increase your portfolio value (so you buy shares in more people) – or – complete the free/paid “offers” such as buying a magazine subscription.

    It’s a clever affiliate model leveraging social gaming techniques; connections, awards, sharing, upgrades, time-based/expiration models, etc…it hits on several ego items.

    Problem is, the game element itself eventually wears thin. The formula behind a users stock price, as I understand it now, rewards you for your connections and consistent sharing- not quantity of sharing. So, unless an active user like Robert Scoble hangs up his SM sharing activites, his value could be infinite.

    Not sure what else is included to render a person’s value as overbought, or even oversold at the moment; and what about stock splits? Could Scoble become the social media share value equivalent to Berkshire Hathaway?

    I’ve seen a few nice examples of it being wisely for additional exposure. Besides the brands like Ford & Audi, Jay Baer is using it to help promote his book, w/Amber Nasland, The Now Revolutions by giving away one free copy each to those users who buy shares & tweet it…