VMware Workstation vs. VirtualBox vs. Parallels 289
snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy takes an in-depth look at VMware Workstation 7, VirtualBox 3.1, and Parallels Desktop 4, three technologies at the heart of 'the biggest shake-up for desktop virtualization in years.' The shake-up, which sees Microsoft's once promising Virtual PC off in the Windows 7 XP Mode weeds, has put VirtualBox — among the best free open source software available for Windows — out front as a general-purpose VM, filling the void left by VMware's move to make Workstation more appealing to developers and admins. Meanwhile, Parallels finally offers a Desktop for Windows on par with its Mac product, as well as Workstation 4 Extreme, which delivers near native performance for graphics, disk, and network I/O. 'There's some genuine innovation going on, especially in the areas of hardware support and application compatibility,' Kennedy writes. 'All support 32- and 64-bit Windows and Linux hosts and guests, and all have added compelling new VM management capabilities, ranging from automated snapshots to live VM migration.'"
Re:Everyone forgets VMware server (Score:5, Interesting)
It does not do accelerated 3d. That is clearly one of the main features for 'normal' users trying to play games in their VM.
Re:Everyone forgets VMware server (Score:1, Interesting)
I wish I could forget VMware Server!
One of their more recent releases went to a fucking horrible Web-based UI. I mean, they installed Java and Tomcat just so this terrible UI could be run. This major fuck-up on their part drove me to VirtualBox, and I haven't looked back.
I've seen a lot of stupid web-based UIs in my time, but what they produced was beyond shitty. It often locked up for no reason, and when it worked, it wasn't even enjoyable to use.
I sincerely hope that whoever came up with that idea got fired. They went from sleek, functional desktop application UI to an extraordinarily shitty web-based UI using AJAX. I still can't comprehend how that could have happened.
Re:VirtualBox lost... (Score:5, Interesting)
Right, 2nd place because of cost alone:
With support for up to 32 virtual CPUs per VM, VirtualBox is now the class leader in terms of raw virtualization muscle. The introduction of branched snapshots is a major usability upgrade from version 3.0, while the new Teleportation feature (live VM migration) means that VirtualBox is now poised to challenge VMware and Microsoft in the datacenter.
Virtualbox (Score:4, Interesting)
it works well with USB devices. I use it to program Lego Mindostorms, and for Midi (to USB) keyboard input and some thumb drives.
it will mount any folder on my mac disk either permenantly or temporarily (these show us as X: or Y: or whatever). What's mildly annoying is that this is 2 step process: first you tell the VM to "add the drive" then you have to use a windows "run" command "net use x: " to tell windows about it. the second step seems strange to me, but you only do it one time.
I've had three things I could not figure out.
I never was able to get a windows media player to mount in media player mode so I could use windows DRM protected WMA files on it and manage it from within windows media player 11. Instead it only will mount as a thumb drive.
I was not able to get a virtual CD device to mount an iso image or burn an iso image (as a work around for getting the WMA files in a format I could play).
It will not burn a CD or DVD.
also I never figured out how to add my Samsung C310 printer to it or my HP multifunction printer to it. it does see them, it just never finds the drivers. However I'm pretty certain this is a windows driver problem and nothing to do with the VM.
I don't game so open GL means squat to me.
Re:Everyone forgets VMware server (Score:1, Interesting)
Just one word ... Starforce.
These DRM schemes have a good track record of hosing down your install. Near native on many games would make VM'ing the thing a no brainer.
Each game on a branch off the main OS install.
I have 1 game that flat out refuses to run on a dual proc machine. VM it...
It solves a multitude of issues. That makes PC gaming suck.
Re:Everyone forgets VMware server (Score:3, Interesting)
If partitions can offer the same kind of flexibility as VMs then sure.
With some VM systems, it is possible to have forks off a central VM. i could have MAIN, MAIN + GAME1, MAIN + GAME2.... If some super hard core LAN gamer wanted to do that they could end up with a dozens partitions... or one VM with several snapshots.
Are there partitioning systems, or tricks with partitioning that might do something like that?
come on! (Score:3, Interesting)
You are saying it yourself:
"There are cases where VMWare may be preferable"
My system is one of those cases.
I just flat out could not get VirtualBox to work correctly. I require a very complex network setup and their networking is not as robust as VMware.
My VMs are pushed out hard, running automated tests. I got occasional lock-ups in VirtualBox while VMware runs for days and days without a single problem.
Re:Everyone forgets VMware server (Score:3, Interesting)
With 4GB+ RAM and 4+ cores why not! ... the video cards now meet minimum SYSTEM requirements of only 2-3 years ago.
Re:Oh, the rebranding is hell. (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, take a look at the built-in linux KVM which is getting seriously competitive in some environments. If combined with an HA-NAS solution and some custom scripts it can get quite useful in large scale deployments (as long as you do not expect pretty GUI management tools). The only serious technical weakness versus VmWare ESX is at this point lack of VMotion (which is a bit of a solution looking for a problem in many real-life scenarios anyway, given that server failures where the VM still keeps running sufficiently to be spirited away alive to another host are as about as numerous as hen's teeth).
So if you are not into some performance-fiendish-disk-io-and-cpu situations (at which point you shouldn't be really virtualizing these porkers anyway) then KVM + HA-NAS might be the trick. KVM is also capable of reading vmdk files so you can cheat using the VMWare Converter just like you would with ESX hosts, just make sure not to install VMWare tools during conversion...
Search the net, people are doing wacky things with KVM already and soon the commercial guys will be fighting an uphill battle ... which is all for the better, IMHO.