Boston Linux & Unix (BLU) Home | Calendar | Mail Lists | List Archives | Desktop SIG | Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings
Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU

BLU Discuss list archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

virtual box

On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 09:47 -0500, Ben Eisenbraun wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 09:53:29AM -0500, Stephen Adler wrote:
> > Anyone had time to kick the tires of Virtual Box?
> It seems a fair number of people have tried it and liked it well enough.
> What I'm really curious about is whether there is any reason to migrate my 
> ~20 linux testing VMs from VMware Server to Virtualbox.  Has anybody run
> both and have an opinion?

VMware Server is much easier to work with if you need to remotely manage
the guests, and if you happen to be on an old opteron that is
pre-hardware-virt, VMware still supports x86_64 guests, while VirtualBox
requires hardware virt support for x86_64 guests. If that's not relevant
to your situation, I find VirtualBox is a better option for desktop
usage. The VirtualBox folks also seem to be more on top of updating
their kernel drivers to work with the very latest kernels than VMware.
No biggie, unless you like running the latest and greatest kernel on the
host machine all the time.

Of course, if I've got a hardware virt capable box, I'll take kvm +
libvirt + virt-manager over both.

Jarod Wilson
jarod-ajLrJawYSntWk0Htik3J/w at

BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS!

Boston Linux & Unix /