New dev machine - what OS?

[easyrider]

I'm building up a new dev machine for .net development mainly to replace the old laptop which the wife keeps using for looking at emails etc
I have a MSDN license so can get my paws on most of the software.
Damn - now i have a clean sheet there are too many options.

I was thinking of using windows server 2008r2 as the main os then using hyper v for the various virtual images. ie: 1 for .net 1.1, another for .net 2 etc.
But is this overkill?
Other options would be winders7 or XP (forget vista ..)
I read somewhere that hyper v can also have a linux vm. That sounds too good to be true.

[AtW]

I was thinking of using windows server 2008r2 as the main os

Choose this only if you like having to type actual reason for you to shutdown box...

[kandr]

Choose this only if you like having to type actual reason for you to shutdown box...

You can turn that off using group policy editor.

[AtW]

You can turn that off using group policy editor.

Yes you, but it will still leave that bitter taste in your mouth...

[Sysman]

I was thinking of using windows server 2008r2 as the main os then using hyper v for the various virtual images. ie: 1 for .net 1.1, another for .net 2 etc.
But is this overkill?
Other options would be winders7 or XP (forget vista ..)
I read somewhere that hyper v can also have a linux vm. That sounds too good to be true.

I've been using vanilla Windows Server 2008 for a while, with VirtualBox (the one from Oracle, not the Open Sauce one) rather than Hyper-V.

Solid as a rock (so far), not as many articficial restrictions that you get with lesser versions of Winders.

VirtualBox can certainly handle Linux, OpenSolaris etc. I don't see why Hyper-V can't (except for aforementioned artificial restrictions).

Now off to see if I can get VirtualBox and Hyper-V co-existing on the same system...

[d000hg]

I'd probably go Win7 64bit, unless you've specific reasons to use 2008? I'm not sure if the days of regular software not running on server OS are gone... does anyone know what the differences are now that client/server OS are more similar?

[Sysman]

I'd probably go Win7 64bit, unless you've specific reasons to use 2008? I'm not sure if the days of regular software not running on server OS are gone... does anyone know what the differences are now that client/server OS are more similar?

Good point. There are various bits of free-for-personal-use software which say "This is a server system - please buy the Pro or Server version".

[doodab]

I have win7 x64 as my host os and use vmware to host whatever OS, database & dev tools I need. The only times I have found this limiting are a) tinkering with windows kernel debugging and b) trying to run vmware server on a linux VM that was running within a vmware ESXi VM. The processors presented to the linux VM by the virtualized ESXi lacked the necessary virtualization support to allow it to run vmware itself.

[SupremeSpod]

What does the congregation think about VMWare and ESX/ESXI instead of installing a host Mircosoft OS?

[Sysman]

Now off to see if I can get VirtualBox and Hyper-V co-existing on the same system...

I've just done that. Windows Server 2008 R2 runs fine (and rather snappily too) as a VM under Hyper-V, but VirtualBox now asks me to enable hardware virtualization when I try to start a (64-bit) VM. It's already enabled so I suspect that Hyper-V is grabbing it for itself. Remove Hyper-V and VirtualBox works fine again.

Dual boot (or acquire another box) seems to be the only way to get experience in both at the mo'.