31–40 of 247 posts
Avoid VirtualBox and becoming trapped in the non-free & personal use only extension by using one of the very decent open source alternatives Boxes[1] or virt-manager[2] [1] https://wiki.gnome.org/action/show/Apps/Boxes [2] https://virt-manager.org/
Be careful about VirtualBox Extensions which is non free on commercial environments. Oracle is hunting non compliance and VB provides them with lots of telemetry.
Would be nice if the Windows Subsystem for Linux started officially supporting graphical apps or a full VM.
Be careful about VirtualBox Extensions which is non free on commercial environments. Oracle is hunting non compliance and VB provides them with lots of telemetry.
> Be careful about VirtualBox Extensions Don't you mean: Be careful to follow the licensing for whatever products you use.
Oracle setting a licensing trap they can spring at their whim? Perish the thought!
> Added support for using Hyper-V as the fallback execution core on Windows host, to avoid inability to run VMs at the price of reduced performance Any comparisons between hyper-v and virtual box performance? I would have assumed hyper-v would be more performant.
Avoid VirtualBox and becoming trapped in the non-free & personal use only extension by using one of the very decent open source alternatives Boxes[1] or virt-manager[2] [1] https://wiki.gnome.org/action/show/Apps/Boxes [2] https://virt-manager.org/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
sometimes you just want a simple vb ubuntu vm. however virtualbox locks copy paste from host to vm support behind extensions which are free only for personal use(which you are using but good luck proving that in court)
No. Copy-paste is not locked behind the VirtualBox Extension Pack. It requires the Guest Additions, which are completely different from the Extension Pack. Extension Pack gives things such as USB passthrough.
> Added support for using Hyper-V as the fallback execution core on Windows host, to avoid inability to run VMs at the price of reduced performance Any comparisons between hyper-v and virtual box performance? I would have assumed hyper-v would be more performant.
I've used both for full time development. It only took about a day of using VirtualBox with sync'd folders to look for alternative solutions due to how bad it was about 4 years ago (not sure about today). Also, VMWare Player is / was so much faster than VirtualBox, and is on par with Hyper-V's performance.
Currently I use Hyper-V today because it's the back-end for Docker for Windows. I couldn't be happier with the performance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you license them? I've never seen a "Buy now" link, only the text about "Free for personal use" every time.
Good question. They don't want to sell them. Just based on the website the licenses are only sold in 5000 unit blocks. The fact that they didn't want to take my money forced me to learn KVM and libvirt. That turned out to work better and be way easier to manage remotely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you license them? I've never seen a "Buy now" link, only the text about "Free for personal use" every time.
You go to the download page, see the link about the licence, click the FAQ link, and then click the store link, it's £36/user
Too bad none of these two bugs has been fixed: https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/9069 https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/12597 (cannot use `sendfile` in nginx inside a virtualbox, due to an eight year old bug)
It's also why I recommend people avoid Docker Toolbox like the plague since it uses VirtualBox under the hood. Either use Docker for Windows (if you have Windows 10 Pro), or roll your own VMWare Player (free) VM which doesn't have that bug, has way better I/O performance in the end and isn't much harder to set up.