Why virtualbox better than vmware workstation?

[dineshj]

I think following reasons are winning points on VMware workstation, what do you think? http://virtualization.sysprobs.com/8-ad ... orkstation

[theog]

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....

[mahjohn]

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

[rhino2]

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.

[stefan.becker]

The list is nonsense.

VMWARE Player is a cost free product, too.

Every product has its advantages.

[mpack]

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.

[theog]

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]

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.

[mpack]

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.

[stefan.becker]

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.

[theog]

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]

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.