2009 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice AwardsThis forum is for the 2009 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards.
You can now vote for your favorite products of 2009. This is your chance to be heard! Voting ends on February 9th.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
View Poll Results: Virtualization Product of the Year
VirtualBox FTW! I'ts free, it's easy to use, and you can even use it on dated hardware w/o too much trouble (I'm on a P4 people...a P4!)
P4 ain't nothin'
Try an Intel Atom. AN INTEL ATOM!
people are so freaked out when I show them win7 running in a VM and then twirl the compiz cube around while it's going in seamless mode. especially on this tiny little thing.
But then again, the s390 isn't that common an architecture.
Well, the z10s did largely replace them
Actually, I try to avoid pointing out to Unix people that they came about most of these technologies about 20 years late (though not always with success ), and that Unix still has a lot to learn before it grows up to be a real multi-user OS
VirtualBox FTW! I'ts free, it's easy to use, and you can even use it on dated hardware w/o too much trouble (I'm on a P4 people...a P4!)
I have tried Virtualbox and it is not easy to use. VMware is also free and as always it is very easy to use. VMware is a lot more mature than Virtualbox. For people that are obvious, look for VMware Server. The great thing about VMware Server is its ability to serve virtual machines to other computers. Of course if they have the VMware console client which is mainly a GUI program that interfaces with VMware Server the user can setup one virtual machine and not have to copy the virtual machine to many computers. This makes VMware Server better than Virtualbox.
I have tried Virtualbox and it is not easy to use. VMware is also free and as always it is very easy to use. VMware is a lot more mature than Virtualbox. For people that are obvious, look for VMware Server. The great thing about VMware Server is its ability to serve virtual machines to other computers. Of course if they have the VMware console client which is mainly a GUI program that interfaces with VMware Server the user can setup one virtual machine and not have to copy the virtual machine to many computers. This makes VMware Server better than Virtualbox.
I use both, but I'm not sure which part of VirtualBox makes it hard to use? I'm curious, because the speed and ease of use are why I ended up switching my personal stuff to VirtualBox (though I still run GSX/ESX at work)
I use both, but I'm not sure which part of VirtualBox makes it hard to use? I'm curious, because the speed and ease of use are why I ended up switching my personal stuff to VirtualBox (though I still run GSX/ESX at work)
Virtualbox is not easy to setup because it requires its network to be setup by hand while VMware does not. If I want to setup either a network bridge or NAT in Virtualbox, the setup gets complicated. It requires the kernels virtual network modules to be compiled if it they are compiled. Also the understanding the methods to setup a virtual network that Virtualbox can identify. Using a physical network connection for Virtualbox also have the same problems. Using USB devices with Virtualbox is more complicated than VMware. Other issues that I had with Virtualbox is its reliability and stability is poor compared to a very, very mature program like VMware.
VMware Server (aka GSX) is easy to setup and easy to use. The speed of both VMware and Virtualbox is the same. The only difference is the stability and reliability which VMware has and Virtualbox does not.
Virtualbox is not easy to setup because it requires its network to be setup by hand while VMware does not. If I want to setup either a network bridge or NAT in Virtualbox, the setup gets complicated. It requires the kernels virtual network modules to be compiled if it they are compiled. Also the understanding the methods to setup a virtual network that Virtualbox can identify. Using a physical network connection for Virtualbox also have the same problems. Using USB devices with Virtualbox is more complicated than VMware. Other issues that I had with Virtualbox is its reliability and stability is poor compared to a very, very mature program like VMware.
VMware Server (aka GSX) is easy to setup and easy to use. The speed of both VMware and Virtualbox is the same. The only difference is the stability and reliability which VMware has and Virtualbox does not.
That's interesting - I've done probably 200 installs of PC-BSD and FreeBSD under Virtual Box (alpha/beta testing installers - gotta love it) without having a single network issue.
I also have Debian Lenny installed under Virtual Box, as well as Windows XP under Virtual Box. Virtual Box itself is under Windows XP in one case and under PC-BSD in the other cases.
Never a single VirtualBox related crash yet, so I guess I can't substantiate your anecdotes with my own lol
Sorry it's being a pain for you, though.
Now as for VMware being mature? That I can back up. Last year, I had 31 tickets open with RedHat, SAP, or Oracle related to VMware stability issues. Easy to tell - I just ran a report on my ticket queue
Biggest problem I had there was caused by Java or kernel settings on the clients, though.
I've been using VMware on windows servers to run linux distros. But if I'm running linux as the host OS, then I think Virtual Box is actually easier to set up. A tough vote, but I think I'm going to go with vmware this year.
What Virtual Box needs (or has, but I'm not aware of it yet?) is VMotion.
On the enterprise level, ESX server is just amazing when it comes to dealing with the throngs of little servers. Ignoring for a moment the architectural/political issues of this - being able to seamlessly migrate a bunch of little servers around on my server farm makes maintenance really easy. I recently upgraded memory on several of those boxes with no down-time noticed by the clients.
Virtual Box.
At college we had Virtual Box, VMWare and MS Virtual PC. Most all students used Virtual Box as it is easy to use and consistently worked for all Guest OS's tried.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.