71–80 of 103 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The free version has all the paid features now. I asked the authors on Twitter about this, they said they will be releasing related products soon that will cover their revenue stream.
And of course they'll grandfather in the people who paid for the now free product less than 6 months ago, right?
Well, I'm excited by the potential of having something better than Virtualbox available for free. I tried converting a linux vm I frequently use via vagrant just now, and it seems to work well except for network bridging: You can't bridge over wifi. Kindof a deal-breaker. The relevant page[1] explains it thus: "Due to features of wireless protocol, level 2 bridges don’t work over Wi-Fi, and so you can’t use wireless…
Just take a look at VBoxManage --help for a crazy list of settings and features that VBox has accumulated during the past ~10 years.
It even supports ATA TRIM so your fs-driver can discard blocks and keep the VDI-file deflated at all times.
Performance-wise: Compiling stuff within VBox on an i7 quad-core (-j5) is almost as fast as native. X on Linux-VMs feels native too, especially when running in fullscreen.
Well, I'm excited by the potential of having something better than Virtualbox available for free. I tried converting a linux vm I frequently use via vagrant just now, and it seems to work well except for network bridging: You can't bridge over wifi. Kindof a deal-breaker. The relevant page[1] explains it thus: "Due to features of wireless protocol, level 2 bridges don’t work over Wi-Fi, and so you can’t use wireless…
Apparently, this can be worked around using a TAP/TUN device but I haven't tried it yet. Perhaps a similar workaround is feasible on OS X/macOS.
Well, I'm excited by the potential of having something better than Virtualbox available for free. I tried converting a linux vm I frequently use via vagrant just now, and it seems to work well except for network bridging: You can't bridge over wifi. Kindof a deal-breaker. The relevant page[1] explains it thus: "Due to features of wireless protocol, level 2 bridges don’t work over Wi-Fi, and so you can’t use wireless…
better than Virtualbox Just take a look at VBoxManage --help for a crazy list of settings and features that VBox has accumulated during the past ~10 years. It even supports ATA TRIM so your fs-driver can discard blocks and keep the VDI-file deflated at all times. Performance-wise: Compiling stuff within VBox on an i7 quad-core (-j5) is almost as fast as native. X on Linux-VMs feels native too, especially when running…
I was happy with VirtualBox's (on OS X) performance until I bought VMware Fusion. I didn't do any benchmarks so I don't have numbers to back up my claim but it definitely "felt" much faster than VirtualBox.
I've tried this as I was really excited after hearing about fusions discontinuation and how incredibly poorly performing virtualbox IO and network is. I found it to be even slower than virtualbox which I have no idea how this is possible. Tested on a late 2015 5k iMac top specced and a late 2015 MacBook top specced both running OSX 10.11 at the time. I will re-test the latest version with MacOS 10.12.
VMware Fusion isn't discontinued. I might be wrong, but wasn't the last update in September? And you can still buy it from VMware.
I'm not really expecting any awesome new features, just bug fixes mostly.
As I move (mostly) back to Linux on the desktop, I'd really like to use VMware but I can't rationalize $249 for a product that is quite possible "end of life" (for all practical purposes).
I've tried this as I was really excited after hearing about fusions discontinuation and how incredibly poorly performing virtualbox IO and network is. I found it to be even slower than virtualbox which I have no idea how this is possible. Tested on a late 2015 5k iMac top specced and a late 2015 MacBook top specced both running OSX 10.11 at the time. I will re-test the latest version with MacOS 10.12.
I see Parallels isn't in that list of software. Is there a reason you don't use it?
I can't complain about Parallels' performance. I was satisfied with it in that regard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
better than Virtualbox Just take a look at VBoxManage --help for a crazy list of settings and features that VBox has accumulated during the past ~10 years. It even supports ATA TRIM so your fs-driver can discard blocks and keep the VDI-file deflated at all times. Performance-wise: Compiling stuff within VBox on an i7 quad-core (-j5) is almost as fast as native. X on Linux-VMs feels native too, especially when running…
Out of curiosity, have you tried anything other than VirtualBox (e.g. VMware Fusion)? I was happy with VirtualBox's (on OS X) performance until I bought VMware Fusion. I didn't do any benchmarks so I don't have numbers to back up my claim but it definitely "felt" much faster than VirtualBox.
You may add: excellent documentation and friendly support (board, irc, list).
If I'll ever have to switch, I'd first need feature-parity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Izik, now that you open-sourced it, why don't you say that it is based on QEMU? Everybody knew it was, and anybody could have asked Apple to pull your app from the store. It would be nice if you guys showed some appreciation for the fact that QEMU developers didn't do that right away.
We will be happy to give credit, let me contact you to see how to do this the best
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is copy paste tools both for windows and linux
Ah, I see the option now, which appears to be on by default. The test VM I just set up (a clean install from ubuntu-gnome-16.04-desktop-amd64.iso) doesn't copy or paste from host to guest or vice versa. I would be happy to log an issue in Github, is there any debug info I should provide?