Discussion about "Summary of Most Requested Features"

[Technologov]

Any opinions to improve are welcome.

Original topic: Summary of Most Requested Features

[Perryg]

Maybe you should reference what it was you started this thread about.

http://forum.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=36136

1. OS Icons as VM shortcuts -- Wish #1889

• Easy enough to do on your own.

2. Parallel port support (LPT) -- Wish #990

• Not going to happen. Unless you want to do it.

3. Drag-n-Drop -- Wish #81

• This would be cool!

4. PCI passthrough aka Intel VT-d/AMD IOMMU -- Wish #5252

• Even if this was done 95% or more of the users will not have the required processor.

[Technologov]

1. OS Icons as VM shortcuts -- Wish #1889
>> Easy enough to do on your own.

Not really. It takes time. Plus It is next to impossible for newbie users.

It is just like saying that Seamless Mode was easy in VBox v1.3 -- Nope - it wasn't,
It was possible for advanced users such as myself, but not for the general crowd, and even for me it was considered a "hack" with limited use case.
Officially Seamless mode was introduced only with VBox v1.5.

4. PCI passthrough aka Intel VT-d/AMD IOMMU -- Wish #5252
>> Even if this was done 95% or more of the users will not have the required processor.

Today not, but in few years people will likely to have such hardware. CPU + chipset.

[sej7278]

i agree with perryg, most of those are still on the wishlist as they'd require a lot of work with limited usage (parallel/pci) or are a bit pointless (icons/win98).

drag'n'drop - snore, this definitely is high on a lot of people's wishlists, they keep banging on about it, i really don't see the attraction myself. someone did do some work on it, but i think it stagnated and was windows-to-windows only anyway.

what about 2d acceleration in linux guests (even working 3d would be nice!) or macosx guest additions?

[sej7278]

1. OS Icons as VM shortcuts -- Wish #1889

looks like the oracle guys are listening, this has just been added to subversion: http://www.virtualbox.org/changeset/34419

it works ok on my linux host in ose 4.0.0, although it doesn't give the shortcut a nice vbox icon or os icon, just a blank default shortcut.

i would do a screenshot but attachments seem to be disabled.

[ajbrehm]

I can't believe that a non-modal GUI (i.e. VM will continue to run when VirtualBox GUI is closed) hasn't made it as a most requested feature.

Anyway, shouldn't the GUI be able to start a VM headless(ly) since it can configure a VM to use the VRDP server?

[sej7278]

I can't believe that a non-modal GUI (i.e. VM will continue to run when VirtualBox GUI is closed) hasn't made it as a most requested feature.

Anyway, shouldn't the GUI be able to start a VM headless(ly) since it can configure a VM to use the VRDP server?

i think the most vocal people seem to be the types who want limted usefulness features like drag'n'drop, rather than basic functionality features like a proper client/server gui.

[mschwartz]

Multiple monitor support for guests other than Windows.

[ajbrehm]

I can't believe that a non-modal GUI (i.e. VM will continue to run when VirtualBox GUI is closed) hasn't made it as a most requested feature.

Anyway, shouldn't the GUI be able to start a VM headless(ly) since it can configure a VM to use the VRDP server?

i think the most vocal people seem to be the types who want limted usefulness features like drag'n'drop, rather than basic functionality features like a proper client/server gui.

Why wouldn't those users use VMware (which incidentally has a proper client/server GUI but no longer exposes that feature to the user) or Virtual PC leaving VirtualBox to others? What's the point of having lots of competing VM applications when all go for the same feature set?

[mschwartz]

...

[kebabbert]

Regarding wish 5252, "pci-e pass through" to accelerate 3D graphics. If this wish was implemented, then there would be no need for VB to implement OpenGL/DirectX right? Then we can scrap the 3D support, because pci-e passthrough would simply allow the guest to accelerate the graphics?

Then the question is, is is easier to implement pci-e passthrough, than to make VB support OpenGL/DX? Which is easiest? If we scrapped the OpenGL/DX support, would the code base be smaller? It would be cleaner and more elegant code, to simply implement pci-e?

[Technologov]

"pci-e passthrough" will only work on capable hardware (VT-d). Current 3D acceleration works on any OpenGL-capable hardware.
"pci-e passthrough" will be in addition to the current way, not a replacement.
VBox code is modular, so making it smaller will not make it cleaner by removing current OpenGL/DX code.

ajbrehm wrote:
>What's the point of having lots of competing VM applications when all go for the same feature set?
The other software is proprietary. VirtualBox is the Open-Source answer to those, so I think we must match (and surpass) in features.

-Technologov

[essam1974]

is it possible to give the guest OS full access to PC hardware and make the HOST OS inactive to give Guest OS full speed of hardware
make this as an option on menu list and can go back to Host OS by activating it again.

[Technologov]

No.

[cutter200]

Adding USB3 support is a very urgent issue as of today's hardware.
I completely agree with the arguments in post 1 of Suggestions (thread): topic: USB 3.0 support.
Please add it to the Most Requested Features