New VM - VirtualBox
#21
Posted 18 January 2007 - 06:32 PM
#22
Posted 18 January 2007 - 09:48 PM
#23
Posted 19 January 2007 - 12:52 AM
Zxian, on Jan 18 2007, 07:32 PM, said:
I would say it's also it's biggest downside: simpler than other virtualization solutions also means "missing advanced features" in this case. It seems like a pretty good alternative to the overpriced vmware workstation though: 200$ for what everybody else gives away (this, VPC and others) or sells quite cheap (e.g. Parallels). Maybe soon enough VMWare will have to live off its ESX sales. They're only going to manage to sell their workstation product for so long at that price.
Not much of a server virtualization product though. VMWare Server (and Virtual Server 2005 R2) is still king there for many, many reasons: VirtualBox doesn't start as service which is absolutely essential, simpler networking, no image conversion tool to use all the existing vhd & vmdk images (nor the upcoming ones being released by various vendors as virtual appliances or as MS are doing right now for evals in vhd format), no migration products like VMWare has (P2V et al), no iSCSI support, no remote admin tools/console, doesn't have any of the scripting stuff vmware has, no upgrade path to something like ESX (with clustering, failover and all that), likely not quite the same level of support available (no major vendor behind it), etc.
By the way, VMWare has a new product: VMware Lab Manager (still beta), and it looks VERY nice and useful for programmers (for doing testing including deployment). Just too bad it'll cost an arm and a leg.
#24
Posted 19 January 2007 - 03:05 AM
I don't think that anyone would argue that VirtualBox is a replacement for VMware, but it's a pretty good freeware alternative.
#25
Posted 19 January 2007 - 03:07 AM
I have tested it last days. This software has a big potential in my opinion. Compare to the other solutions. Its simplicity make the software efficient instead VMWare and VPC.
Otherwise, some improvements (sure they will come soon) about usb, network and sound, will be better.
It is the only which allow me, without errors, to install solaris 10 !
Good chance Virtual Box
#26
Posted 19 January 2007 - 02:06 PM
#27
Posted 19 January 2007 - 09:35 PM
edit: according to their site, "Support for Mac OS X and 64-bit operating systems is currently in the works."
This post has been edited by ripken204: 19 January 2007 - 09:38 PM
#28
Posted 20 January 2007 - 03:50 PM
#29
Posted 20 January 2007 - 04:02 PM
This post has been edited by Camarade_Tux: 20 January 2007 - 04:03 PM
#30
Posted 22 January 2007 - 04:56 PM
MD5 checksums match too, so perhaps VirtualBox doesn't like it?
#31
Posted 23 January 2007 - 05:05 PM
#32
Posted 23 January 2007 - 06:12 PM
unrelated but figured it might help someone currently the only way I know of to get files into the vm is by creating an iso file and mounting it or through a shared network folder but you must connect by ip ex "\\192.168.0.4"
#33
Posted 23 January 2007 - 08:31 PM
#34
Posted 23 January 2007 - 11:18 PM
found a solution using VBoxManage make a shortcut to it like follows:
"\Program Files\InnoTek VirtualBox\VBoxManage.exe" startvm XP_PRO_SP2
I named my vm "XP_PRO_SP2" btw its case sensitive.
Have a look at the VirtualBox User Manual:
Quote
Due to VirtualBox clean, modular design, it is relatively painless to create an alternative frontend to
the complex virtualization engine that is the core of VirtualBox. If VirtualBox, the graphical user
interface described in Chapter 3, Starting out with VirtualBox,does not suit your needs, VirtualBox
comes with several alternative frontends for certain scenarios. These are:
1. VBoxManage, which allows you to control all aspects of VirtualBox from the command line --
including those that the VirtualBox graphical user interface does not expose. This is described
in the following chapter.
2. VBoxSDL, an alternative graphical front end based on SDL. This is described in Section 6.2,
“VBoxSDL, the full-screen interface”.
3. VBoxVRDP, another frontend that produces no visible output on the host at all, but merely acts
as a VRDP server; see Section 6.3, “VBoxVRDP, the headless VRDP server”.
#36
Posted 24 January 2007 - 02:49 PM
#37
Posted 25 January 2007 - 03:17 AM
Also Virtual PC can be a bit complex for people who have never used a VM before (must add Additiona components to allow mouse to escape VM window withjout having to remeber the escape key)
#38
Posted 25 January 2007 - 01:37 PM
phkninja said:
Yes
....the horror of it all....
...how cruel were the Connectix/Microsoft guys....
jaclaz
#39
Posted 25 January 2007 - 02:03 PM
#40
Posted 26 January 2007 - 03:22 AM
Quote
- ← Microsoft added new, app-like Outlook features to Hotmail
- Technology News
- New Internet Domain Suffixes? →



Help

Back to top









