Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

VirtualBox 6.0 released

virtualbox.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 247 posts

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#231

Post by mr_toad »

jason_slack wrote: post #71
tmn007 wrote: post #3

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.

Sorry. I have never heard of this. I switched to VB earlier this year for simple home use testing apps and working with large data sets. VMWare Fusion just caused me to many problems. Can you explain how I need to protect myself?

If you’re a home user, and you’re sitting behind an IP address provided by a residential ISP, Oracle isn’t going to be bothering you.

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#232

Post by mr_toad »

octopoc wrote: post #45
bakery2k wrote: post #43

Is anyone using VirtualBox on the desktop? Specifically, to run Linux/macOS/Windows guests on a macOS host? Would you recommend it? Or is the best option VMware Fusion, Parallels, or something else?

I recently got a Mac and wanted to avoid the cost of Parallels, so I tried VirtualBox first. It was insanely slow. Like, I would be typing text into a VM and I would type a line, then wait and watch the characters appear. This happened on a 2018 Macbook Pro host with 32GB RAM. This happened on both Windows and Ubuntu guests. So, I tried Parallels and it was so fast I can't really tell the difference between the host…

How much RAM did you allocate to the guest? From my experience the defaults are inadequate for desktop virtualisation. You need to allocate ~4GB of RAM and a couple of cores to get a smooth desktop.

I’ve had Fedora and Ubuntu guests running on a 2015 Mac Mini with no issues.

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#233

Post by jsjohnst »

apsdsm wrote: post #28
jsjohnst wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define “ruined” to you. By my definition, oracle took something that was “ok’ish, especially when you didn’t want to pay and just had basic needs” product and have slowly chipped away anything that could be considered good for most.

↑ this sounds like a pretty good definition of ruined.

Exactly my thoughts, but GP claimed that Vbox wasn’t ruined.

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#234

Post by jstarks »

cm2187 wrote: post #155
jstarks wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Windows 10, we provide a NAT network option by default. This should work seamlessly even if you switch between WiFi and Ethernet. So even this problem should go away for most people now.

Didn't the NAT get pulled from hyper-V?

I don’t think so. It’s only there by default on client, not server, though.

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#235

Post by pseudalopex »

DrPhish wrote: post #146
bubblethink wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's anything but. It's utterly useless. Just use virt-manager while it lasts. It is being deprecated though, after which you will be forced to use boxes or the other virt-manager replacement.

Having never used Boxes before, I was excited for a better VM management tool than virt-manager. However, I just tried using it (on Debian stretch), and unfortunately I have to agree that it doesn't do much beyond look pretty. afaict you could only go to consoles, check a few resource usage graphs, send power commands and manage snapshots. There were very few configuration options and no ability to manipulate virtual…

It looks like Red Hat intends Cockpit (a web interface) to replace virt-manager eventually.[1]

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659477

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#236

Post by cpv »

octopoc wrote: post #45
bakery2k wrote: post #43

Is anyone using VirtualBox on the desktop? Specifically, to run Linux/macOS/Windows guests on a macOS host? Would you recommend it? Or is the best option VMware Fusion, Parallels, or something else?

I recently got a Mac and wanted to avoid the cost of Parallels, so I tried VirtualBox first. It was insanely slow. Like, I would be typing text into a VM and I would type a line, then wait and watch the characters appear. This happened on a 2018 Macbook Pro host with 32GB RAM. This happened on both Windows and Ubuntu guests. So, I tried Parallels and it was so fast I can't really tell the difference between the host…

I had to run VB on Mac host, with linux guest. No issues, but every time I need to create a VM, I set different settings than the default ones (more ram, 2 cpu cores instead of one, 3d acceleration + more video memory).

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#237

Post by zaphirplane »

organsnyder wrote: post #103
robert_foss wrote: post #10

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/

Even worse: Oracle is going around and threatening to sue enterprises that show traffic to the extensions download site from their IP blocks. Happened recently at a previous employer of mine.

Wow so those enterprises are paying massive money for consultants, Realestate, ms-office/windows, databases, CMS, ERP ... etc But don’t want to pay for using the VB extensions. The horror of it. No sympathy today

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#238

Post by pizza234 »

robert_foss wrote: post #10

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/

This is somewhat excessive. There are still valid use cases where Virtualbox comes for free - private users or professional users/companies with a relatively small number of workstations (Oracle's going after companies who use a large number of unlicensed installations).

Also, it is still possible to build a free extension pack; it would be a great project. After all, Virtualbox is GPL, and it shouldn't be underestimated the amount of work that has been, and is being, put into it.

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#239

Post by lloeki »

rbanffy wrote: post #162
lloeki wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The equivalent on macOS would leverage Hypervisor.framework, like xhyve or Veertu. https://github.com/machyve/xhyve https://veertu.com/anka-technology/#hypervisor

Docker for Mac has moved from VirtualBox to the built-in hypervisor. I have the impression that causes some pain when it starts eating away battery faster than the monitor can charge the laptop.

Indeed, it's called HyperKit[0][1], and it's based straight off xhyve[2].

Also, there's docker-machine-driver-xhyve for people that prefer using docker-machine (like I do) instead of DfM.

[0]: https://github.com/moby/hyperkit

[1]: https://blog.docker.com/2016/05/docker-unikernels-open-sourc...

[2]: https://github.com/moby/hyperkit/tree/master/src/

Re: VirtualBox 6.0 released

#240

Post by rbanffy »

koolba wrote: post #166
torstenvl wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USB 2.0 and 3.0 are not fully supported without the extension pack.

Which again are irrelevant for the common “just for Vagrant” use case.

I have used it for testing on different Windows browsers, to check whether https://github.com/rbanffy/3270font would install correctly, and running some Windows software from my bank. The only time I needed the extensions was when I needed to reflash my Blackberry 10 DevAlpha (whose battery, sadly, is dead - I loved that phone)
Post reply on HN