VirtualBox 1.6 released!
-
- Volunteer
- Posts: 1064
- Joined: 10. May 2007, 10:27
- Primary OS: MS Windows Vista
- VBox Version: PUEL
- Guest OSses: Windows, Linux, Solaris
VirtualBox 1.6 released!
The first major release since being acquired by Sun Microsystems is now available. Version 1.6 has new Mac and Solaris host platform support, new high performance virtual devices, improved scalability and Web Services. Get it now at http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads
For a list of new features and changes see http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Changelog
For a list of new features and changes see http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Changelog
Last edited by sandervl on 6. Jun 2008, 09:18, edited 1 time in total.
Repository?
No more ubuntu repository for automatic updates?
-
- Volunteer
- Posts: 17798
- Joined: 17. Mar 2008, 13:41
- Primary OS: Debian other
- VBox Version: PUEL
- Guest OSses: Windows XP, Windows 7, Linux
- Location: /dev/random
I noticed that too. It would be nice to have a repo again.
Read the Forum Posting Guide before opening a topic.
VirtualBox FAQ: Check this before asking questions.
Online User Manual: A must read if you want to know what we're talking about.
Howto: Install Linux Guest Additions
Howto: Use Shared Folders on Linux Guest
See the Tutorials and FAQ section at the top of the Forum for more guides.
Try searching the forums first with Google and add the site filter for this forum.
E.g. install guest additions site:forums.virtualbox.org
Retired from this Forum since OSSO introduction.
VirtualBox FAQ: Check this before asking questions.
Online User Manual: A must read if you want to know what we're talking about.
Howto: Install Linux Guest Additions
Howto: Use Shared Folders on Linux Guest
See the Tutorials and FAQ section at the top of the Forum for more guides.
Try searching the forums first with Google and add the site filter for this forum.
E.g. install guest additions site:forums.virtualbox.org
Retired from this Forum since OSSO introduction.
-
- Posts: 76
- Joined: 22. Mar 2008, 01:49
- Primary OS: MS Windows XP
- VBox Version: PUEL
- Guest OSses: MS Windows XP
- Location: Feuchtwangen, Germany
not running on Win 2000
Why was it necessary to change VirtualBox, so that the msi rejects to install on a win 2000 box?
Networking
Can we have an update on this issue:
http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?t=6092
http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?t=6092
-
- Volunteer
- Posts: 1064
- Joined: 10. May 2007, 10:27
- Primary OS: MS Windows Vista
- VBox Version: PUEL
- Guest OSses: Windows, Linux, Solaris
Re: not running on Win 2000
We are now using APIs that are not available in Win2k. We didn't think dropping support for that ancient system would affect many. If many people object, then we could reconsider.Hans Eberhardt wrote:Why was it necessary to change VirtualBox, so that the msi rejects to install on a win 2000 box?
Please reconsider the support for Windows 2000 SP4+ systems. I have used this system for 8 years. It is not as out of date as many people think. It depends on the users who use it as their working environment, and not "ancient" systems.
Many programmers like to find some reasons or excuses for dropping certain kind of systems. For example, API not supported, MS lifecycle, and so on. Developers can always find some ways to implement the functions that OS needed if they really want to do it. Since VirtualBox is free, so the users may not use it anymore because of the lack of Windows 2000 support. The ending is just there, upgrade to Windows XP, or don't use the latest versions of VirtualBox, and they stick to so-called "ancient" systems said by some people or MS.
For me, VirtualBox now is really a junk. I can see the new features listed in the changelog, but can't enjoy this new version of VirtualBox, unless using Windows XP or higher. Very disappointed to see the declaration of death for VirtualBox on Windows 2000.
Many programmers like to find some reasons or excuses for dropping certain kind of systems. For example, API not supported, MS lifecycle, and so on. Developers can always find some ways to implement the functions that OS needed if they really want to do it. Since VirtualBox is free, so the users may not use it anymore because of the lack of Windows 2000 support. The ending is just there, upgrade to Windows XP, or don't use the latest versions of VirtualBox, and they stick to so-called "ancient" systems said by some people or MS.
For me, VirtualBox now is really a junk. I can see the new features listed in the changelog, but can't enjoy this new version of VirtualBox, unless using Windows XP or higher. Very disappointed to see the declaration of death for VirtualBox on Windows 2000.
-
- Volunteer
- Posts: 3342
- Joined: 10. May 2007, 16:59
- Location: Israel
-
- Volunteer
- Posts: 3342
- Joined: 10. May 2007, 16:59
- Location: Israel
opened bug:
http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/1474
BTW: why VT is not possible ? I think both MS VPC 2007 and VMware 6.0 doing VT... aren't they ?
http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/1474
BTW: why VT is not possible ? I think both MS VPC 2007 and VMware 6.0 doing VT... aren't they ?
Another vote for continued support for Win2000 as host.
As others have noted, Win2000 is definitely still in use. I'm not concerned about VT support.
Technologov wrote:
> I think both MS VPC 2007 and VMware 6.0 doing VT... aren't they ?
Not sure about VMWare, but as far as I know VPC2007 doesn't support Win2000 (that's what got me started with VirtualBox :-)
John
As others have noted, Win2000 is definitely still in use. I'm not concerned about VT support.
Technologov wrote:
> I think both MS VPC 2007 and VMware 6.0 doing VT... aren't they ?
Not sure about VMWare, but as far as I know VPC2007 doesn't support Win2000 (that's what got me started with VirtualBox :-)
John
-
- Volunteer
- Posts: 17798
- Joined: 17. Mar 2008, 13:41
- Primary OS: Debian other
- VBox Version: PUEL
- Guest OSses: Windows XP, Windows 7, Linux
- Location: /dev/random
As for why VT is not going to be supported in 2000 is very simple. Windows 2000 does not support it. There are no APIs for it or anything remotely to access the CPU that way. XP and up do have support for this. Though if you would install VB on a clean, first release XP, VT support isn't there either. You need at least SP1(a) to support it properly (perhaps even SP2).Technologov wrote:opened bug:
http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/1474
BTW: why VT is not possible ? I think both MS VPC 2007 and VMware 6.0 doing VT... aren't they ?
Read the Forum Posting Guide before opening a topic.
VirtualBox FAQ: Check this before asking questions.
Online User Manual: A must read if you want to know what we're talking about.
Howto: Install Linux Guest Additions
Howto: Use Shared Folders on Linux Guest
See the Tutorials and FAQ section at the top of the Forum for more guides.
Try searching the forums first with Google and add the site filter for this forum.
E.g. install guest additions site:forums.virtualbox.org
Retired from this Forum since OSSO introduction.
VirtualBox FAQ: Check this before asking questions.
Online User Manual: A must read if you want to know what we're talking about.
Howto: Install Linux Guest Additions
Howto: Use Shared Folders on Linux Guest
See the Tutorials and FAQ section at the top of the Forum for more guides.
Try searching the forums first with Google and add the site filter for this forum.
E.g. install guest additions site:forums.virtualbox.org
Retired from this Forum since OSSO introduction.
Thanks for the post, Hans. I won't bother trying to upgrade on Win2k Host.
I run Win2k (Advanced Server), still, and intend to continue until next year when MS drops all support for it. ...
I agree Win2k support needs to continue, for a while at least. Maybe until SVB 2.0 ...
But frankly, I feel that SMP Guest support as well as x64 support are far more important than either VT|-V or, even, maintaining code for 8 year old OS.
I run Win2k (Advanced Server), still, and intend to continue until next year when MS drops all support for it. ...
I agree Win2k support needs to continue, for a while at least. Maybe until SVB 2.0 ...
But frankly, I feel that SMP Guest support as well as x64 support are far more important than either VT|-V or, even, maintaining code for 8 year old OS.
-
- Volunteer
- Posts: 1064
- Joined: 10. May 2007, 10:27
- Primary OS: MS Windows Vista
- VBox Version: PUEL
- Guest OSses: Windows, Linux, Solaris
That's not true. We use a specific api to execute code on all cores/cpus, which is not available in win2k. There are other ways to do it, but they aren't very pretty.Sasquatch wrote:As for why VT is not going to be supported in 2000 is very simple. Windows 2000 does not support it. There are no APIs for it or anything remotely to access the CPU that way. XP and up do have support for this. Though if you would install VB on a clean, first release XP, VT support isn't there either. You need at least SP1(a) to support it properly (perhaps even SP2).Technologov wrote:opened bug:
http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/1474
BTW: why VT is not possible ? I think both MS VPC 2007 and VMware 6.0 doing VT... aren't they ?
VT-x support in itself does not depend on the host OS at all.
From my testings of 1.6 on my home system I am currently very disappointed from the changes, and will definitly not install the new version in my company's production environment.
There might be internal changes and improvements that I was not able to notice (as for example I am not using Mac-OS), but the changes that I was able to test were all causing more trouble then they fixed things.
If these issues are not fixed soon, I definitly will have to go back to VMWare even if I really like the work flow with VB much much more. But if certain important features are not working or present or made even worse, this will make it impossible to continue with VB.
There might be internal changes and improvements that I was not able to notice (as for example I am not using Mac-OS), but the changes that I was able to test were all causing more trouble then they fixed things.
- Whenever the Guest changes it's resolution, the window switches back from fullscreen to windowed.
For once I would really like to see an "exclusive mode" as it is called in VMWare, where the guest has full control over the screen (including resolution changes) and on the other hand: if I set the application to fullscreen, I expect it to stay in fullscreen and not switch back at every display change. Why was this changed? - Installing the new guest-additions in Unbuntu (8.04) will not uninstall the currently present additions and increase CPU usage to 100%.
Ubuntu was working perfect till I upgraded the guest additions. Now I have 2 VBoxClient's running, each using up all CPU, and even if I manually disable or remove one of them, the other one stays at 100% CPU all the time. So for me it is no longer possible to use this Ubuntu VB, even if it was working perfectly in 1.5.6. - Resolution is limited to 1150x1024 (if I remember correctly) and the VB won't switch to a higher resolution in fullscreen unless I increase the graphic card's memory.
Why is this limited? I see no reason to suddenly disable a feature that was working perfectly in the previous version. Especially that I now have to increase the video-memory on all machines just so they will switch to a higher resolution in fullscreen is not only annoying but as well puzzles me why this has been changed anyway. And why can I no longer change the display nor the resolution in the guest manually beyond this new max resolution?
If these issues are not fixed soon, I definitly will have to go back to VMWare even if I really like the work flow with VB much much more. But if certain important features are not working or present or made even worse, this will make it impossible to continue with VB.