VOGONS

Common searches


First post, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/09/11/37T … stations_1.html

Basically, VirtualBox 2.0 is where VMware Workstation was three to five years ago: a maturing, relatively stable tool for running multiple guest operating systems on a host PC. Still, for many casual users this is all they really need. To them, VirtualBox fills a void between the full-featured Workstation and VMware's free Player application, the latter of which places Workstation's powerful runtime engine in a frustratingly restrictive straightjacket with minimal configurability. So while VirtualBox may not be able to compete with VMware on features (it doesn't have all that many to speak of) or performance (it's at least 30 percent slower in OfficeBench tests on the aforementioned Dell XPS M1710), Sun has managed to carve out a niche where its newly acquired product can thrive while growing stronger and occasionally nipping at the heels of its more capable competitor.

Calling VMware Workstation 6.5 versus Sun xVM VirtualBox 2.0 a two-horse “race” might have been misleading. With Workstation's expansive feature set and top-notch performance, it really isn't much of a competition. Still, VirtualBox delivers a combination of features that you simply cannot find outside of VMware, including USB device integration and 64-bit guest OS support. Add to this the killer price (free) and you have the makings of a cult classic. And though VirtualBox doesn't measure up to VMware Workstation today, don't count Sun out. As one of the preeminent engineering powerhouses, the company has the talent and resources to make a serious run at anyone it targets. VMware had better not let its guard down anytime soon.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Make your games work offline

Reply 1 of 7, by valnar

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

It's been my experience that VirtualBox isn't as good as VMware or MS Virtual PC. It's too bad that InfoWorld didn't include VPC 2007, even if they think it's going away, because it is still pretty good. Parallels would have also been a nice comparison.

The most interesting point about the article is the "Value" number for the FREE VirtualBox. They gave it a 9. What does it take to get a 10?

Reply 2 of 7, by Reckless

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Not sure why so many people slag off Virtual PC (even not including it in a comparison such as this). It may not be the best product out there but it's free, has very little installation impact to the host and works pretty well (I run OpenSUSE 11, Ubuntu 8 Desktop, Windows 2003, Windows XP, Windows 98, Windows 3.1 (with Bob!) & DOS virtual PC images). Most of my use is investigative so no need for 'absolute' performance. Shame it doesn't [and never will it seems] support x64 based guests.

On the comparison itself, I thought VirtualBox [like VM Player] had way too much installation baggage. I've run the latest version but it did seem pretty swift when I tried out an XP install on it a while back. VM Workstation is just several steps ahead I'd say 😀

Reply 3 of 7, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

No development. (Sorry but one SP a year if that is not good and when they are released they aren't very many changes)
Lack of features. (Still no USB support which we've been asking for since 2002-3....)
Lack of updates. (Released updates pale in comparison to quality of Connectix updates....and pale in comparison to any other emulators updates)
No community (Connectix forum gone leaving a crappy MS newsgroup)
Loss of support over time (Games not working, Support for some guestOS/additions dropped, Support for host OS dropped (Windows 2000)). What's next XP (host) support dropped?
Bought by Microsoft (Meaning development stops which it did)

Comparing VPC 2007 to Vmware 6.0 (or 6.5) and claiming that there is little impact to the host is like comparing Office 2000 to Office 2007.....heh. Pretty apt analogy too since VPC really hasn't had anything major done to it development wise since Connectix closed down. (Of course unlike Office Vmware actually has alot of good features that people need and use, whereas VPC is serverly lacking)

So yeah, if Office 2000 (VPC 2007) is good enough for your uses then fine but don't pretend that it's all that.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Make your games work offline

Reply 4 of 7, by Jorpho

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Isn't VPC for Windows an entirely separate product from the Macintosh product that Microsoft acquired from Connectix? (Much like how VMware Fusion is a separate product from Workstation etc?)

I didn't even know Sun was in charge of VirtualBox these days. Is that a new thing?

Reply 5 of 7, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Well not exactly new they bought them a couple of months ago I think. Doesn't seem to have hurt them any.

I think Virtual PC for MAC was discontinued but I don't keep up with Mac's.

With Vmware 6.5 the PC version of Workstation will I think be alot closer to the MAC version than before. Would be nice if they'd name them the same since every time I see VMware Fusion it just doesn't sound like an VM program. (Although I can sort of see where the name comes in....I guess- "Fusion" of Windows and MAC).

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Make your games work offline

Reply 6 of 7, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Restored my 98SE image today using Vmware Workstation 6.5.1, Virtual PC 2007 SP1 and VirtualBox v1.2.2.

Guess which one I can't get to finish booting 98SE.....

Yep, VirtualBox.

Thought I'd give VirtualBox another chance with 9x. Looks like it still sucks for it.

So yeah, stay away from Windows 9x in VirtualBox.

Last edited by DosFreak on 2009-01-29, 20:00. Edited 1 time in total.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Make your games work offline