PDA

View Full Version : What you use? Xen, VBox or VMware?



ukripper
July 6th, 2007, 11:01 AM
What virtual app you use? Xen, VirtualBox or VMware

I have found a good Xen tutorial if someone wants to use on server-
http://www.howtoforge.com/ubuntu_7.04_xen_from_repositories

Zzl1xndd
July 6th, 2007, 11:28 AM
Didn't vote as I use non-of-them even VM of Windows scares me.

ukripper
July 6th, 2007, 11:30 AM
Didn't vote as I use non-of-them even VM of Windows scares me.

So what you use?

ziggykg
July 6th, 2007, 11:32 AM
I use VMWare just because it was easy to install and configure from Feisty (And I had a VMWare VM already). Not tried Xen or VBox so can't really comment on them.

Zzl1xndd
July 6th, 2007, 11:32 AM
So what you use?

LOL guess I did forget to say that, the short answer is I don't use any thing of the kind no VMs, no Crossoveroffice, No wine, just Ubuntu

ukripper
July 6th, 2007, 11:33 AM
I use VMWare just because it was easy to install and configure from Feisty (And I had a VMWare VM already). Not tried Xen or VBox so can't really comment on them.

i personally use VirtualBox found it quiet easy to configure and works really well with Feisty and Edgy both.

ukripper
July 6th, 2007, 11:36 AM
LOL guess I did forget to say that, the short answer is I don't use any thing of the kind no VMs, no Crossoveroffice, No wine, just Ubuntu

Thats great! Even i am trying to minimize my Virtual resources but I have to use XP extensively to use MS SQL part of my job.

ukripper
July 6th, 2007, 12:05 PM
is anyone using VMs other than above 3 options?

init1
July 6th, 2007, 12:08 PM
I use qemu, but that's not for windows, and I don't think it's a VM, is it?

AndyCooll
July 6th, 2007, 12:30 PM
I voted VirtualBox. When I do look at other distros I tend to use VirtualBox. However I haven't been using virtual apps very much recently.

My XP image however is a VMware one so if I ever needed to use it any point again I presume I'd need to install VMware for the occasion.

:cool:

zodmaner
July 6th, 2007, 01:15 PM
VirtualBox is nice. I find it the easiest virtual machine to config (compares to VMware and QEMU). I especially like the ability to mount and run iso image natively. Also it is very fast. A lot faster than QEMU (which I had previously used).

thisllub
July 6th, 2007, 01:47 PM
Vmware is very flexible. Qemu is too slow, Xen can't do X properly.I haven't tried VirtualBox yet.
Most of my Vms are Linux in Linux.

Configuring a server to run from a file is far quicker than running a machine up from scratch.

tigerpants
July 6th, 2007, 02:09 PM
Virtual box is superb.

Noticed that it uses the exact same icons for hard drive activity and cd rom access etc when its running as parallels on OSX. Is it the same bit of kit but ported?

ukripper
July 6th, 2007, 09:31 PM
Virtual box is superb.

Noticed that it uses the exact same icons for hard drive activity and cd rom access etc when its running as parallels on OSX. Is it the same bit of kit but ported?

i agree Virtualbox is just great and very easy to configure as compared to VMware.

init1
July 6th, 2007, 09:43 PM
VirtualBox is nice. I find it the easiest virtual machine to config (compares to VMware and QEMU). I especially like the ability to mount and run iso image natively. Also it is very fast. A lot faster than QEMU (which I had previously used).
Yes, qemu is very slow. I might consider something else, but that's all I have used so far. I use it to test out distros that don't work on my computer, like reactos and yoper. They work fine in qemu.

mad0master
July 6th, 2007, 10:13 PM
Virtual Box, cause it's kinda easy to install and light-weight.

Frak
July 6th, 2007, 10:55 PM
1. VMWare
2. VBox
3. Parallels
4. Qemu
5. MS Virtual PC 2007
6. MS Virtual Server 2003
7. Xen

ukripper
July 7th, 2007, 07:37 AM
1. VMWare
2. VBox
3. Parallels
4. Qemu
5. MS Virtual PC 2007
6. MS Virtual Server 2003
7. Xen

I wonder what you use parallels for ? Is it VM?

smoker
July 7th, 2007, 08:17 AM
VirtualBox is nice. I find it the easiest virtual machine to config (compares to VMware and QEMU). I especially like the ability to mount and run iso image natively. Also it is very fast...

ditto, ditto,:)

RAV TUX
July 7th, 2007, 08:25 AM
I wonder what you use parallels for ? Is it VM?

VM for Mac products.



Parallels Desktop for Mac is a software product by Parallels, Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels%2C_Inc.), a developer of desktop and server virtualization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtualization) software. It is the first software suite to bring virtualization mainstream on Macintosh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh) computers with Intel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel) processors.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels_Desktop_for_Mac

Frak
July 7th, 2007, 08:31 AM
VM for Mac products.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels_Desktop_for_Mac
The ONLY computer I run Vista on, because if something goes wrong its only virtual. Plus, my Mac Pro is probably one of the only computers I have that has enough horsepower to run Vista Ultamate efficiently.
Oh and Coherence is very useful.

regomodo
July 7th, 2007, 10:33 AM
Virtualbox ftw!

I just need to find a thread on how to have a coherence like setup. Think it uses rdesktop and something else.

I use it to run XP and Linux distros in it.

ukripper
July 7th, 2007, 11:57 PM
bump

leetkrew
August 21st, 2008, 04:37 PM
VPC 2007
pros)
i) simple interface
ii) network bridging is automatic (hidden virtual network)
iii) ISO and VFD support
iv) Start VM automatically (optional)
v) You can install another one copy of Windows OEM OS.
cons)
i) Most (or almost all) Linux installation is hard as hell. Even live CDs and ISOs are not compatible.
ii) no USB support
iii) no remote interface.

Virtual Box
pros)
i) open source
ii) Remote desktop support (better than VMWare's VNC support)
iii) small hard disk and memory usage
iv) Cross platform
cons)
i) Network bridging is manual
ii) complicated interface
iii) Poor documentation (help files)
iv) Windows licensing issues (refer to EULA)

VMWare workstation i am currently using it
pros)
i)Linux friendly
ii) Supports Mac OSX Tiger and Mac OSX Leopard (not officially supports)
iii) VNC support
iv) autofit guest's window
v) Virtual Machine is customizable and configurable.

cons)
i) Advanced interface
ii) Windows licensing issues (refer to EULA)
iii) Disables Windows Vista's AutoPlay. Still need to delete some registry keys to re-enable it.

I uninstalled VPC 2007 and VirtualBox yesterday.

Canis familiaris
August 21st, 2008, 04:55 PM
Why nobody talks about KVM?

mips
August 21st, 2008, 07:58 PM
Why nobody talks about KVM?

Probably because it does not have as good a GUI or features? Never tried it hough.

Canis familiaris
August 21st, 2008, 07:59 PM
Probably because it does not have as good a GUI or features? Never tried it hough.

Well thats true. I didn't really like its GUI. But it looks promising.

Skorzen
August 21st, 2008, 08:04 PM
VirtualBox. Never had the need to change for its concurrents.

Chronon
November 14th, 2008, 11:18 PM
I use VirtualBox because it's free and easy to use. I have used VMware player for windows, but can't create my own images without paying for software. I like the desktop integration that VirtualBox offers too! Seamless mouse transfers and ability to share clipboards between Kubuntu and whatever virtualized OS I am running is convenient! I didn't find an easy way to do this with VMware when I tried it.

gn2
November 15th, 2008, 12:20 AM
I don't use any thing of the kind no VMs, no Crossoveroffice, No wine, just Ubuntu

Me too :)

binbash
November 15th, 2008, 12:22 AM
vmware workstation or virtualbox sometimes.

doorknob60
November 15th, 2008, 12:48 AM
Virtualbox (when I use VMs that is, I don't very often)

Eisenwinter
November 15th, 2008, 01:46 AM
VirtualBox seriously lacks support for 64-bit architectures, it won't let you install anything not 32-bit.

CholericKoala
November 15th, 2008, 01:52 AM
VirtualBox seriously lacks support for 64-bit architectures, it won't let you install anything not 32-bit.

Everything lacks support for 64 bit architectures

smartboyathome
November 15th, 2008, 01:57 AM
I use KVM with the qemulator GUI. Just made x86 use kvm instead of QEMU, and away I went. :D


Everything lacks support for 64 bit architectures

Not QEMU. I don't think KVM does either if you are on a 64 bit host.

JohnFH
November 15th, 2008, 02:04 AM
VirtualBox seriously lacks support for 64-bit architectures, it won't let you install anything not 32-bit.

Really? That's not my experience. I'm running 64 bit Virtualbox with both 32 and 64 bit VMs.

I use VirtualBox all the time for trying out new distros and for testing future releases. I also use it for Windows XP occasionally and I'm not ashamed of that at all (unlike the "Look at me, I'm great cos I only use Ubuntu and nothing else" brigade).