VMware vs. VirtualBox

which one do all of u prefer? which is more secure, and gives more features and compatibility overall? give me ur opinions on the 2.

 

I'm glad someone else besides myself wants to ask these questions I know one huge difference between the two: Cost!

 

im looking purely at features and security, everything except the price. for me im trying to see which is the best if cost wasnt an issue.

 

I like them both.
Both are pretty secure.
I prefer Vmware mainly for 2 reasons.
1. It's snapshots. The ability to go backward and forward in the snapshot is simply fantastic.
2. Is easier to clone a vmware virtual pc, or to move it in another folder.
Having said that I prefer using Vbox for running linux virtual machines. The seamless integration is better than unity, especially the visible toolbar of the guest OS.
Also Virtualbox "machines" seem a bit faster than vmware workstation ones.

You can give them a try and see what fits you best.
The vmware free ones are:
Vmware player and Vmware server

Panagiotis

 

by default it has 4 services that run, but i just go into services.msc and set them to manual so they only launch wen i open vmware so its not a problem for me and with winpatrol i can see if they re-enable themselves.

 

nice info.

 

Whether you'll use VMware services (manual or automatic state) or not (disabled state) will depend on the VM setup. DHCP can be disabled if you fix the IP, no need for NAT if you use bridged networking, VMware Agent is a convenience, not a must and if you run a VM as admin (or do not access it remotely), there is no need for the Authorization service. There is a new one, "USB Arbitration", which needs to be run if you want USB passthrough, haven't really looked into that one yet. So you can actually disable all VMware services for good and still have perfectly functional VMs. At least I always had Workstation setup this way. I also disable both default virtual NICs.
That being said, VirtualBox has really matured lately and catching up with Workstation quickly. Big thumbs up

 

wow i did not know all that, awesome tip

 

VBox uses 80MB hd space and VMware 1Gb.
Vbox is overall faster to deal with and no services in background.
Also returning to last snapshot only takes a few seconds in VBox.
Oh VBox is free.

 

Could anyone tell me what does hardware virtualization exactly do?

As my cpu doesn't support hardware virtualization,is there any difference between VB and VM on this aspect?

 

I tried Windows 7 RC both in VB and VMware. Host was XP SP2 with Centrino 1.7, 1.5 GB Ram.

1- VB was smoother than VMware.
2- I absolutely love seamless mode of VB.

However snapshots feature of VMware is wonderfull, no answer for that by VB. I wonder when VB can implement such a feature.

 

like most of u already said, beside that Vbox is free,often updated ( and that count a lot ppl) , its also faster than VMware. leave no running services in the background when it shutdown.

also u can copy / clone its images /vdi files easily with a little tool u can locate in Vbox support forum

maybe the biggest disadvantage in Vbox is like some said , its the snapshot taking and rollback , but since most of us use it for testing stuff or learning new os , i don't find it very annoying , and thing can be made nice with it

cheers

 

Normally free vs paid is not an issue for me, because it's usually $40-$50 -> free, but when you're looking at a whopping $189 -> free, now we're talking about a serious difference here, and this is where it does matter when comparing two products, at least imo.

 

virtualbox seems to be adding alot of the funcionality of wmware recently. for example being able to use the graphics cards properly in virtual machines.
im hoping an upgraded snapshot feature is next.

I dont like the services that wmware has plus when you uninstall it it does leave services and drivers behind.

 

I have recently been running both Vbox and VMware Workstation to try and answer this same question. Other than it being a little more difficult to switch between snapshots In my opinion Vbox is easier to use and a little faster. I also had some problems with VMWare at first but I account this to my not being familiar with the software. Anyway I have only been running both for a little more than a week and have just started to get acquainted with the vboxmanage command line utility, so I haven't had much experience with either, but right now VBox is my favorite.

 

One of the vmware workstation features that I like and works seamlessly is Unity. Setting up a linux vm, minimizing with Unity and sharing folders works very well. I hope the pic explains further, here hovering over Windows start brings up the vm or vms, for example bringing up a Fx browser vm window onto the host.

 

Apart from snap shots which work really well in vmware you can set up auto protect, taking snap shots at intervals.
Being able to map, mount a virtual disk on the host, clone a vm, set up teams are some nice features.
Don't forget vmware ace.

 

I'd say pricing is a major factor here. If you only look at features (compatibility), then VMware wins hands down. Take a closer look at this -

With v7, there are 5 services now. They will not stop when you exit VMware, if that's what you're referring to.

A hint to anyone complaining on running processes: if you need a VMware service or you're not sure that it's safe to disable, put all of them on 'manual'. Then create a batch file for VMware with "net start-net stop" commands, so the services start and stop with the application.

This is not my observation, but I will check again and repost back.

Cheers,

 

Seamless inmtergration of VBox is very similar and I like that more.

 

Virtual box does not support multi-core cpu virtualization. If you are using multi-core cpu but not supporting hardware virtualization one,you can't have multi-core cpu in guest OS. However,VM and Vpc can still give guest OS virtualized multi-core cpu in this situation.

I read it in another forum.
The cpu in my laptop is intel dual-core t3400 and it does not support HV. Then I guess VM will provide better performance for the guest os is able to use a virtualized dual-core cpu too,right?