For the server side, I can see this working... However I still have to see how this works about the client. We probably will see something more transarent, something like how Windows 32 handles 16 bit programs, running under a seperate process...

>And yes, VM-ware, or virtual servers will always be an alternative, though performance still has something to be desired. But of course 10 years will be enough to address this issue as well.

>First, I like Rod's idea. I have four virtual machines right now, to support different versions of SQL Server, .NET, and Crystal.

>I was not a fan of VN-ware in the past, because of the performance, even when I dedicated as much RAM as possible to the virutal machine. Then I got a duo-core laptop, and could not believe how much better the performance was. Now when I use wm-ware it feels much closer to running as if it were a regular "host" machine.

We run VM ware esspcially for support (creating VPN connections on a single server, without breaking network connectivity). However it is also a platform where we intent to test on different OSs. With the current clientbase it is all XP though. Esspecially with the ever increasing amounts of RAM and the avaialblity of the increasing numbers of CPU cores on a single processor, it is getting more attractive for running server software like SQL Server. Currently my complaint is more about the slow remote control. Running the vmware on the server through Terminal services, screen updates are not like in TS itself and therefore it seems sluggish. We are running the free version of vm-ware, maybe the paid one performs better.