PDA

View Full Version : Virtualbox is excellent.




stchman
Sep 7, 2012, 01:43 PM
I installed Virtualbox last night as I wanted to be able to use Octave and MacPorts was not working.

I downloaded the Ubuntu x64 iso and installed Ubuntu in Virtualbox. I can not believed how well it worked.

I gave Ubuntu 4GB of RAM and 128MB for video. I allocated 40GB max to the Ubuntu install.

Ubuntu installed in about 5 minutes. After completing I am able to run Ubuntu full screen on one desktop and OS X on another.



solderguy1
Sep 7, 2012, 01:53 PM
Nice isn't it. I'm currently using it for Ubuntu, Centos (free Redhat clone) and Windows 8 Consumer Preview. Software is so much fun when it's powerful and free :)

brentmore
Sep 7, 2012, 01:58 PM
I installed Virtualbox last night as I wanted to be able to use Octave and MacPorts was not working.

I downloaded the Ubuntu x64 iso and installed Ubuntu in Virtualbox. I can not believed how well it worked.

I gave Ubuntu 4GB of RAM and 128MB for video. I allocated 40GB max to the Ubuntu install.

Ubuntu installed in about 5 minutes. After completing I am able to run Ubuntu full screen on one desktop and OS X on another.

+1

I've been using it for a few years and it's gotten better with every revision. I'm running CAD/CAM apps, Minitab and the Microsoft Office Suite in Windows 7 with no issues at all. Plus it's updated quite often, so it's nice to know there's lots of attention and support for the software.

robvas
Sep 7, 2012, 02:38 PM
I installed Virtualbox last night as I wanted to be able to use Octave and MacPorts was not working.

I downloaded the Ubuntu x64 iso and installed Ubuntu in Virtualbox. I can not believed how well it worked.

I gave Ubuntu 4GB of RAM and 128MB for video. I allocated 40GB max to the Ubuntu install.

Ubuntu installed in about 5 minutes. After completing I am able to run Ubuntu full screen on one desktop and OS X on another.

I'd drop it down to 1GB and see how it goes. You don't want to reserve too much RAM for a virtual machine.

stchman
Sep 7, 2012, 03:04 PM
I'd drop it down to 1GB and see how it goes. You don't want to reserve too much RAM for a virtual machine.

My MBA has 8GB, and the RAM is only used while the VM is running.

Maven1975
Sep 8, 2012, 06:39 PM
Any thoughts on VBox Vs. VM Ware? I have used VMW for ages and have never gotten around to trying Virtual Box.

twintin
Sep 9, 2012, 03:22 AM
I'd drop it down to 1GB and see how it goes. You don't want to reserve too much RAM for a virtual machine.

I'm running it with 1 GB RAM and Ubuntu still works excellent.

dyn
Sep 9, 2012, 02:41 PM
Any thoughts on VBox Vs. VM Ware? I have used VMW for ages and have never gotten around to trying Virtual Box.
Phoronix (http://www.phoronix.com) has done some tests with that and their conclusion was very simple: VMware Fusion is much faster than Virtualbox when it comes to cpu and graphics power: VMware Virtualization With OpenGL Still Smacks Oracle VirtualBox (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=vmware_virtualbox_osx&num=1) & VMware Fusion Stuns VirtualBox In CPU Tests (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=vmware_virtualbox_osxcpu&num=1).

The newer Fusion 5.0 has improved performance over Fusion 4.1. From what I've seen the upcoming Virtualbox 4.2 should have some improvement in the 3D department as well. Am hoping they redo the test with Fusion 5 and Virtualbox 4.2.

They also have some great articles about running Linux on the MBP Retina btw. Worth the look as well!

KylePowers
Sep 9, 2012, 07:55 PM
I've been using Virtualbox for years, most recently on my 2011 MBA with Windows 7. Works flawlessly and better than Windows ever ran on my old laptop (which is an unfair comparison, but true nonetheless).

I don't disagree that Parallels or VMware are probably better, but the price of $0.00 keeps me tied to VirtualBox, especially since it serves my purposes just fine :)

Titanium81
Sep 9, 2012, 11:18 PM
I've been using Virtualbox for years, most recently on my 2011 MBA with Windows 7. Works flawlessly and better than Windows ever ran on my old laptop (which is an unfair comparison, but true nonetheless).

I don't disagree that Parallels or VMware are probably better, but the price of $0.00 keeps me tied to VirtualBox, especially since it serves my purposes just fine :)

VMware on the 2012 MacBook Air literally flys and it seamlessly works with OS X. But yes I can see that $0.00 for Virtualbox, is a very nice price for something that lets you "get the job done".

jbzcar
Sep 9, 2012, 11:35 PM
VMware on the 2012 MacBook Air literally flys and it seamlessly works with OS X. But yes I can see that $0.00 for Virtualbox, is a very nice price for something that lets you "get the job done".

I run VMWare on my Air and love it. :)

Just loaded Virtualbox on the wife's Windows box so I can use her external drive as my Time Capsule. Found a guide online and it actually works, lol.

throAU
Sep 10, 2012, 01:33 AM
Any thoughts on VBox Vs. VM Ware? I have used VMW for ages and have never gotten around to trying Virtual Box.

Disclaimer:

I have been a VMware user since workstation 1.0 on PC, and have used all versions through to v8.0 on PC. Fusion 3 and 4 on OS X. Standalone ESX/ESXi. I have used Virtualbox on and off on both OS X and Windows, and VirtualPC from microsoft. I'm a trained ESXi admin. You could say i'm a virtualisation nerd, and a massive VMware fanboy.


My thoughts:
I prefer Fusion or Workstation, mostly for compatibility with the vmware family as far as virtual machine format goes, and because of the UI (the virtualbox UI is a bit clunky for configuring virtual disks, and removable media).

However, despite all that - virtualbox provides 90%+ of the functionality, and is free. It is integrated well with the open source operating systems, Linux and X11 even includes drivers for virtualbox built in.

If you're looking to run VMs (especially Linux), your first port of call should be virtualbox, and only bother to spend the money on fusion or parallels if it won't do what you require.

however if you already have VMware, stepping back to virtualbox will feel a little clunky. the VMs generally run just fine, but configuring them is a little less slick.

It is certainly good enough for the vast majority of people though (unless you're trying to run games, and even then both fusion and parallels are hit/miss) - and you can't argue with the price.