Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Discussions related to using VirtualBox on Windows hosts.

Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby dineshj » 10. Jan 2010, 21:08

I think following reasons are winning points on VMware workstation, what do you think? http://virtualization.sysprobs.com/8-advantages-sun-virtualbox-vmware-workstation
dineshj
 
Posts: 34
Joined: 21. Nov 2009, 07:48
Primary OS: MS Windows XP
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: Windows Vista

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby theog » 10. Jan 2010, 21:54

I VB is better because it is free.

Trust me, if Workstation 7 was not $180, we would all be using that product.

Far as your list, I disagree with 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Workstation 7 is powerful... the ability to view Windows 7 graphics in their true form says it all....
theog
 
Posts: 13
Joined: 2. Jan 2010, 20:42
Primary OS: MS Windows XP
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: XP, WIN7, WIN7 64, UBUNTU

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby mahjohn » 10. Jan 2010, 22:09

4,5 and 6 are both valid, i've seen better performance in my virtualbox environment than in a vmware workstation environment
mahjohn
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 10. Jan 2010, 21:51
Primary OS: MS Windows 7
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: Windows XP

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby rhino2 » 10. Jan 2010, 22:09

I disagree with this:

3) Patches and Updates Available


There has been a CPU, Network and Save State bug since 3.1.1. See my thread in this forum. I've asked for patches and updates and haven't receive any replies.

At work, I use VM Workstation. I emailed in a ticket about a minor save state bug and received a status update with 2 hours and there was a patch/hotfix within 72 hours. No, I don't have a support contact with them.

Open Source doesn't somehow magically generate patches or fixes. You know what generates patches and fixes? Motivated and talented developers. This is a false argument. You can have motivated and talented developers regardless of license.
Last edited by rhino2 on 10. Jan 2010, 22:12, edited 1 time in total.
rhino2
 
Posts: 4
Joined: 5. Jan 2010, 22:34
Primary OS: MS Windows 7
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: XP

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby stefan.becker » 10. Jan 2010, 22:10

The list is nonsense.

VMWARE Player is a cost free product, too.

Every product has its advantages.
stefan.becker
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7618
Joined: 7. Jun 2007, 21:53

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby mpack » 11. Jan 2010, 11:01

I think you make too much of VirtualBox being open source. You mention some theoretical advantages to this, but fail to recognize the reality: "updates and patches" rarely come from anyone other than the official devteam (I think there have been something like two third party contributions in the entire history of Vbox, and those were minor). So, development would go at the same pace whether VBox was open source or not: in fact it's possible that if VBox represented a bigger revenue stream for Sun then they might devote more resources to it and non free closed source might make development go faster.

Don't get me wrong: I believe there are some benefits to VBox being open source, but they aren't the benefits you mention in your list.

I also think too much is made of software being free (meaning costing nothing). Yes, I would want to be able to try it out for a while for free (without nags, crippling limitations or adware) before deciding that I want to buy it, and I don't know that I'd want to pay $180 - I'd be happier with something around $50. But other than that the free element doesn't weigh much with me. In fact it's a worry: I don't really understand how a company can devote a lot of resources to a project that doesn't bring in much money.
mpack
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 32679
Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Mostly XP

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby theog » 12. Jan 2010, 15:17

stefan.becker wrote:The list is nonsense.

VMWARE Player is a cost free product, too.

Every product has its advantages.


VM workstation is a paid product. Please read the difference between player and workstation. Or maybe you know the difference but don't need the extra features in workstation. That is fine. VBox and VM workstation happens to be an equal comparison in regards to features.

I agree the original list by the op is nonsense... lol
theog
 
Posts: 13
Joined: 2. Jan 2010, 20:42
Primary OS: MS Windows XP
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: XP, WIN7, WIN7 64, UBUNTU

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby theog » 12. Jan 2010, 15:30

mahjohn wrote:4,5 and 6 are both valid, i've seen better performance in my virtualbox environment than in a vmware workstation environment


Guess you were not hit the 3.1 bug, where your cpu usage on your desktop machine goes to 100% and locks up your main computer.

If you look at that thread, you will know it is a real issue... the solution is to go back to Vbox 3.0, then everything is fine. So much for performance and update argument. This issue has hit Vbox on and off between versions, from what I have read.

I still have not had anyone say if VM Workstation was free that they would still use virtualbox. Heck, if MS virtual pc supported x64 hosts, I'd use that... it is a smooth product.

Vbox will get there, no doubt. Personally, I think they will have to perform more testing before releasing an update. If not, eventually virtual pc will go host x64, along with other free features, and vbox will sorta die.

I guess the other solution, we don't mention, is parallels. Cheaper than vmware, but costs more than vbox and vpc. I believe it is $80.

And another product we don't talk about, where you get to use 100% of your computer resources is Microsoft's steady state.... that is the bomb... not sure how many of you used that... definitely worth setting up for those resource intensive projects.
theog
 
Posts: 13
Joined: 2. Jan 2010, 20:42
Primary OS: MS Windows XP
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: XP, WIN7, WIN7 64, UBUNTU

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby mpack » 12. Jan 2010, 21:10

theog wrote:If not, eventually virtual pc will go host x64, along with other free features, and vbox will sorta die.

I doubt that. For one thing Virtual PC no longer exists as an independant product, and the remnant built into Win7 won't run without VT-x, and doesn't even officially support all flavours of Windows, never mind Linux et al. I don't see MS ever easing the road to Linux for anybody, so I suspect that situation will not change any time soon.
mpack
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 32679
Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Mostly XP

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby stefan.becker » 12. Jan 2010, 21:41

theog wrote:
stefan.becker wrote:The list is nonsense.

VMWARE Player is a cost free product, too.

Every product has its advantages.


VM workstation is a paid product. Please read the difference between player and workstation. Or maybe you know the difference but don't need the extra features in workstation. That is fine. VBox and VM workstation happens to be an equal comparison in regards to features.

I agree the original list by the op is nonsense... lol


I think you dont know exact all features from VMWARE Workstation.

In the meantime VMWARE Player is able to install Guests without vmx-editing. So you can compare VMWARE Player with VBOX Workstation. Snapshots is a missing feature from the Player, thats all.

And VBOX i a paid product for companies, too.
stefan.becker
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7618
Joined: 7. Jun 2007, 21:53

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby theog » 13. Jan 2010, 02:46

stefan.becker wrote:
theog wrote:
stefan.becker wrote:The list is nonsense.

VMWARE Player is a cost free product, too.

Every product has its advantages.


VM workstation is a paid product. Please read the difference between player and workstation. Or maybe you know the difference but don't need the extra features in workstation. That is fine. VBox and VM workstation happens to be an equal comparison in regards to features.

I agree the original list by the op is nonsense... lol


I think you dont know exact all features from VMWARE Workstation.

In the meantime VMWARE Player is able to install Guests without vmx-editing. So you can compare VMWARE Player with VBOX Workstation. Snapshots is a missing feature from the Player, thats all.

And VBOX i a paid product for companies, too.


I know all the features.. I can read them on the website.

At any rate, snapshots is enough... what is the point of having a virtual machine without snapshots?
theog
 
Posts: 13
Joined: 2. Jan 2010, 20:42
Primary OS: MS Windows XP
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: XP, WIN7, WIN7 64, UBUNTU

Re: Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

Postby theog » 13. Jan 2010, 02:51

mpack wrote:
theog wrote:If not, eventually virtual pc will go host x64, along with other free features, and vbox will sorta die.

I doubt that. For one thing Virtual PC no longer exists as an independant product, and the remnant built into Win7 won't run without VT-x, and doesn't even officially support all flavours of Windows, never mind Linux et al. I don't see MS ever easing the road to Linux for anybody, so I suspect that situation will not change any time soon.


having it built in win 7 or whatever is after win 7 would be good enough to put a dent in vbox.

Linux? lol... okay.

I'm talking personal... not corporate... at work we use vmware, exclusively.
theog
 
Posts: 13
Joined: 2. Jan 2010, 20:42
Primary OS: MS Windows XP
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: XP, WIN7, WIN7 64, UBUNTU


Return to VirtualBox on Windows Hosts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: corhsin and 24 guests