|
I've been practically living in VMs for a decade if not more.
Just had a look. I do have it installed, and launches with no visible issue. Neat. But...
I'm not knocking it - but given everything gets wiped on every shutdown, what are some usage scenarios that, in your opinion, makes it "better" than a VM, given that you can create checkpoints and roll them back? Is it somehow "more isolated" than a VM might be by default, that sort of thing?
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: I'm not knocking it - but given everything gets wiped on every shutdown, what are some usage scenarios that, in your opinion, makes it "better" than a VM, given that you can create checkpoints and roll them back? Is it somehow "more isolated" than a VM might be by default, that sort of thing?
It's quick and convenient. A no brainer.
There will always be people that prefer bare metal and those that prefer VMs. For those that deal with graphics, video editing, etc. bare metal is very valuable. And this is just a cool little way to pop up an isolated environment and get on about your day if you're a bare metal type of person.
If you live in VMs... you do you. It's still cool though. As for me, I just buy new machines now if I want a different OS as I personally don't have a need for snapshots. So, it's cool.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Are you sure this sandbox is running on bare metal?
'cuz if I look at Device Manager, it's showing Hyper-V drivers managing the hardware, including the hard drive, the NIC, the video hardware, the audio hardware, etc...just like my VMs do.
HKLM\HARDWARE\DESCRIPTION\System\BIOS is showing the Hyper-V BIOS just like my VMs do.
Open Hardware Monitor shows all components using the same virtualized identifiers just like my VMs do.
And to top it all off, the documentation tells you that if you want to run that sandbox in a VM, you have to enable nested virtualization.
Sure doesn't look like bare metal to me.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Sure doesn't look like bare metal to me.
I never once said it wasn't using Hyper-V. I said some folks prefer running on bare metal and for those that do it's a cool feature. At this point, you're just looking to argue. I'm not going to entertain you.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I said some folks prefer running on bare metal and for those that do it's a cool feature
Then I misunderstood and apologize - I was under the impression you were suggesting the sandbox was running on bare metal (as opposed to being virtualized), and because of that, that was preferable (for those who prefer it that way).
With my response, I wasn't trying to argue what might be "preferable" (that's all that is, a preference, and there's no good or bad answer to that); I was only saying that, based on my observations, it is virtualized...and so if someone's trying to avoid virtualization, than this sandboxing isn't the right solution.
Arguing was never my intent. I was more interested in discussing the architecture from a technical perspective.
But cool beans, man, we're good, and I'm happy to leave the discussion at that.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: But cool beans, man, we're good, and I'm happy to leave the discussion at that.
Fair enough. And sorry if I sound on edge... it's just I am. You know how it is online these days. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Fair enough. And sorry if I sound on edge... it's just I am
Everyone seems on edge after these last few years.
Besides, it's sometimes difficult to tell what's intentionally confrontational vs what isn't...and I've been known to sometimes choose my words poorly. 
Jeremy Falcon wrote: You know how it is online these days
If you're only on edge when online, then you're doing better than a lot of people.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: If you're only on edge when online, then you're doing better than a lot of people.
Weeeeellllll.... to be honest it's offline too. Regardless of where I've moved to in the past several years, I always seem to move next to stoners lighting it up. I don't want to breathe that crap and get a second hand high.
I'm sure everyone has their issues though, economy, etc. But, I don't see how getting the world stoned is gonna help.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: But, I don't see how getting the world stoned is gonna help.
In my (limited) experience, stoners are pretty mellow; seems to me the only thing most of them worry about is what they're gonna do when they get the munchies. 
|
|
|
|
|
That's just it... I'd wish they worried about the other people they affect with their stank. It's strong now. Your neighbors will smell it.
Take an edible if you want to waste your life. At least it's only your life you're wasting.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Many of the newer security features being added to Windows 11 use sandboxes by default. In fact, when you turn on some of the Windows 11 security features, Windows 11 becomes a virtual machine running in partition zero of the Hyper-V client.
|
|
|
|
|
That's cool to know.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
RDC has basically become useless to me for a few of the servers I manage. Two I know are Azure VMs, the other is a customer's system so I'm not sure where it's hosted. Checking at the https://downdetector.com/status/windows-azure/[^] doesn't look encouraging.
Symptoms: RDC session starts loading and gets stuck. If I'm lucky enough to get to a desktop it is sluggish to completely unresponsive. I also find that my local drive is missing and that copy/paste is not always available...and when it has been, it's failed twice now to copy a little 10MB file...which reportedly will take over 30 minutes to copy. 
I've checked my connection here, reset the cable modem and rebooted the PC to no avail. 
The websites on one the servers with the problem all seem to be working OK so it's not a big deal, though it does keep me from doing work.
On a side note, as part of troubleshooting at Azure, I tried accessing the portal which required me to authenticate through the Authenticator app on my Android phone. The portal gives me a webpage with a number to enter into the Authenticator app. I do this...nothing...is something supposed to happen? Fail
Try the next method available, 'use a verification code': It shows a red error message with a link for error details which shows this:
Request Id: b6114a2e-09d3-4e92-bf64-7ca3a8194f00
Correlation Id: c586a8c8-d656-4ada-9cc4-57d988f1ec79
Timestamp: 2023-06-12T20:16:19.558Z
FAIL! How helpful! OK, there are 4 methods so I'll just keep going...
Next authentication method: a text to my cell phone. Is something supposed to happen? (10 minutes later, still nothing) FAIL!
There's one more method which is to call my cell phone. I'll let you know! 
I've got work to do, but the machines are working against me today! The day is almost gone and I haven't written a line of code!  
Fixed!: Don't ask me how, but changing out a Ring doorbell caused the problem. The house doorbell/chime happens to be on the same circuit as the cable modem and wireless router. Yesterday I did cycle the power on the cable modem, but not the router. This morning I reset both and everything is back to normal.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
"Hope is contagious"
modified 13-Jun-23 9:55am.
|
|
|
|
|
RDC?
Residual Dipolar Coupling
Research Degrees Committee (UK)
Regional Distribution Center
Reusable Dialog Component
Resolver to Digital Converter (electronics)
Remote Data Center (failover configuration for disaster recovery)
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: RDC?
It turns out that the RDC problem was caused by a Ring Doorbell Camera! 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
"Hope is contagious"
|
|
|
|
|
I gave up on Ring Doorbell. Too many weird things to fix as well.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
I’m curious as to why this story was included in the Developer News section of the daily news email, it’s 10 years old.
|
|
|
|
|
I’m going to guess it was because someone didn’t notice the publish date on it.
I’m sure you never make trivial mistakes. Be proud of that.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
You are correct, I’m very proud 😎
|
|
|
|
|
I did notice it mentioned the event took place in 2011, but didn't think much of it, as stories often surface only many years later because someone made some comment and facts were only discovered later.
But in this case...you're right, the CNet article is from March 2013.
ChatGPT strikes again?
|
|
|
|
|
The original article that CNET cites is from 2013 too.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I would hope CNet's 2013 article isn't quoting an article from 2023... 
|
|
|
|
|
You’ve seen Back to the Future? 😂
|
|
|
|
|
The thought did cross my mind that some CNet employees might have access to a time machine...and that scared me.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting question.
Insider News forums has all of those stories. So you could add a comment this one and ask?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
