I've thought in the past that if I got a new PC, it could be interesting to simply install VB (or similar) and then treat that as my OS... install everything inside VB so the host is merely a shell for the guest.
If we're talking Windows7/8 for host+guest, would this be inefficient in VB in terms of performance? If you were doing this, would you give the VM 100% of cores/RAM/etc or what would be the optimum approach?
In reality I might have two VMs - "work" and "home" as I am a freelance developer working at home... I'd fire up "work" all day for development, then close it and fire up "home" in the evening.
Thanks!
Using a VM as my full-time setup... sensible?
-
mpack
- Site Moderator
- Posts: 39134
- Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
- Primary OS: MS Windows 10
- VBox Version: VirtualBox+Oracle ExtPack
- Guest OSses: Mostly XP
Re: Using a VM as my full-time setup... sensible?
It's perfectly sensible, especially if you avoid snapshots and make regular backups of the entire VM folder.
Win8 isn't needed on the host - let the fanboys be Win8's bleeding edge. A Win7-64bit host, with oodles of RAM and a 4-core CPU should be suitable (I mean cores or separate CPUs, not the hyperthread marketing con).
If you only intend to run a 32bit guest, and only one guest at a time, then XP Pro would IMHO still give you the best performance. The host still needs to have a dual core CPU with 4GB RAM and it's vital that it supports VT-x.
You will also need a huge 2nd internal drive so you don't have to worry about virtual disk size. 1TB minimum, 2TB is the max that native XP drivers support. Use dynamic VDI disks for the VM.
Win8 isn't needed on the host - let the fanboys be Win8's bleeding edge. A Win7-64bit host, with oodles of RAM and a 4-core CPU should be suitable (I mean cores or separate CPUs, not the hyperthread marketing con).
If you only intend to run a 32bit guest, and only one guest at a time, then XP Pro would IMHO still give you the best performance. The host still needs to have a dual core CPU with 4GB RAM and it's vital that it supports VT-x.
You will also need a huge 2nd internal drive so you don't have to worry about virtual disk size. 1TB minimum, 2TB is the max that native XP drivers support. Use dynamic VDI disks for the VM.
Re: Using a VM as my full-time setup... sensible?
What about performance VS running apps on the host directly? I know VM technologies have made pretty epic improvements the last decade but is it an issue at all?mpack wrote:It's perfectly sensible, especially if you avoid snapshots and make regular backups of the entire VM folder.
-
mpack
- Site Moderator
- Posts: 39134
- Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
- Primary OS: MS Windows 10
- VBox Version: VirtualBox+Oracle ExtPack
- Guest OSses: Mostly XP
Re: Using a VM as my full-time setup... sensible?
If you want top performance then forget VMs. It simply isn't the priority.
For typically office apps, compiling programs, spreadsheets, internet browsing etc you won't notice a performance hit. VMs are not good for gaming, fast 3D rendering, fullscreen video etc. Any application that really cares about timing or being realtime (e.g. audio recording) will probably suck in a VM.
For typically office apps, compiling programs, spreadsheets, internet browsing etc you won't notice a performance hit. VMs are not good for gaming, fast 3D rendering, fullscreen video etc. Any application that really cares about timing or being realtime (e.g. audio recording) will probably suck in a VM.
Re: Using a VM as my full-time setup... sensible?
It has it's pros and cons.
Pros:
You will not have to reset up your software / data again should you upgrade your PC
You can move / copy a guest from one PC to another
You can backup a guest by cloning it (best way) or simply copying the whole thing from the host while the VM is off
You can use snapshots to test software / settings etc, "fixing" the guest after an unwanted change is as simple as reverting to a prior snapshot
You can clone a guest and use multiple versions of the same guest on one host - different setups for different people? Different needs?
Cons:
You will more than likely have to reactivate Windows guests as it still sees the host CPU and will see a different one should you move / copy the guest to another host
Performance WILL take a hit, especially for games, videos and high CPU or video apps
SOME hardware will be a challenge to get to work or may not even be possible
Your RAM is cut down from the host amount, you have to leave SOME for the host to use, so a 64 bit host OS with more than 4 GB is a plus
Some software may just not work at all
So if you are just cruising the internet, reading email etc it may be just the ticket. Play lots of graphics intensive games or video editing software and it may be aggravating to use. If you have a spare OS license to work with why not ? It will basically be FREE to give it a try, only investment will be your time and effort.
I do something like this. I have a work PC that of course I need to be careful with what I do that's not work related on. I set up VBox and a Windows 7 OS that I use for my "play time", it does just about everything I need it to do but is a lot slower than a native box running an OS. I took the extra step of creating my VMs on a Truecrypt encrypted volume, that way EVERYTHING is basically off the host with the exception of the VBox installation itself. This too adds a layer of drag on the performance but keeps me safe from prying eyes - at least as long as the TC volume is not mounted. I happen to do this on an external SATA drive so if I remove it pretty much all evidence of anything else is gone except the VBox installation (which I COULD put on the second drive too) and the TrueCrypt files. if you do it right and have access to a second NON "work" network you can run the host on the "work" network and use a bridged connection so the guest can run on the "play" network - this requires 2 NICs on the host, one each for each network.
Pros:
You will not have to reset up your software / data again should you upgrade your PC
You can move / copy a guest from one PC to another
You can backup a guest by cloning it (best way) or simply copying the whole thing from the host while the VM is off
You can use snapshots to test software / settings etc, "fixing" the guest after an unwanted change is as simple as reverting to a prior snapshot
You can clone a guest and use multiple versions of the same guest on one host - different setups for different people? Different needs?
Cons:
You will more than likely have to reactivate Windows guests as it still sees the host CPU and will see a different one should you move / copy the guest to another host
Performance WILL take a hit, especially for games, videos and high CPU or video apps
SOME hardware will be a challenge to get to work or may not even be possible
Your RAM is cut down from the host amount, you have to leave SOME for the host to use, so a 64 bit host OS with more than 4 GB is a plus
Some software may just not work at all
So if you are just cruising the internet, reading email etc it may be just the ticket. Play lots of graphics intensive games or video editing software and it may be aggravating to use. If you have a spare OS license to work with why not ? It will basically be FREE to give it a try, only investment will be your time and effort.
I do something like this. I have a work PC that of course I need to be careful with what I do that's not work related on. I set up VBox and a Windows 7 OS that I use for my "play time", it does just about everything I need it to do but is a lot slower than a native box running an OS. I took the extra step of creating my VMs on a Truecrypt encrypted volume, that way EVERYTHING is basically off the host with the exception of the VBox installation itself. This too adds a layer of drag on the performance but keeps me safe from prying eyes - at least as long as the TC volume is not mounted. I happen to do this on an external SATA drive so if I remove it pretty much all evidence of anything else is gone except the VBox installation (which I COULD put on the second drive too) and the TrueCrypt files. if you do it right and have access to a second NON "work" network you can run the host on the "work" network and use a bridged connection so the guest can run on the "play" network - this requires 2 NICs on the host, one each for each network.