At the moment, the page's "MD5 sum" link is not resolving.
VirtualBox 3.0 Released
11–20 of 39 posts
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#123.0 Already? Wasn't just sometime ago 2.3 the newest? While VirtualBox is really great I like OSE (OpenSourceEdition) better. Unfortunately if one needs e.g. usbhotplug then you have to use the commercial branch :/ Does anyone know when OSE will have that feature?
Probably when the developers are so rich they don't need money for food or rent.
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#13but how is it for mac uses? it seems not as nice compared to parallels?
It's fine. I use it to run Solaris 10 and Windows XP on my MBP.
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#14but how is it for mac uses? it seems not as nice compared to parallels?
I ran VirtualBox on my MPB for nearly a year. It was a fantastic platform to run XP under for web development testing. It works very seamlessly.
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#153.0 Already? Wasn't just sometime ago 2.3 the newest? While VirtualBox is really great I like OSE (OpenSourceEdition) better. Unfortunately if one needs e.g. usbhotplug then you have to use the commercial branch :/ Does anyone know when OSE will have that feature?
Probably when the developers are so rich they don't need money for food or rent.
Wont they be working at Oracle soon?
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#163.0 Already? Wasn't just sometime ago 2.3 the newest? While VirtualBox is really great I like OSE (OpenSourceEdition) better. Unfortunately if one needs e.g. usbhotplug then you have to use the commercial branch :/ Does anyone know when OSE will have that feature?
Probably when the developers are so rich they don't need money for food or rent.
Not to mention that there's nothing preventing a 3rd party from developing an open source patch implementing support for this very feature.
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#17New features include guest SMP support, OpenGL 2.0, and experimental Direct3D 8/9 support (for windows guests, obviously...)
Warning: Guest SMP only works if you have a cpu with Intel VT-x or AMD-V.
Damn, why did I buy a Pentium Dual-Core instead of a regular Core 2 Duo? :/
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#18but how is it for mac uses? it seems not as nice compared to parallels?
Works pretty well on 10.5.7 with WinXP SP3 as guest.
I couldn't install a firewall for testing (Comodo CIS, it'll hang WinXP on reboot) on the guest w/o VT-X/AMD-V off. I hope they fixed it in this new version.
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#19I've just finished comparing virtualbox and vmware, and not of my own volition. I needed to compare a bunch of different file system solutions for clustering (see post elsewhere) and after working with vmware for several days finally gave up (vmware server 2.0), and tried the same under virtualbox. Virtualbox did the job quietly without fuss or license keys, where vmware was nothing but a pita and eventually refused…
I can confirm this, had a similar experience. Though the VMWare Player is a nice piece of easy software for people who don't need all the features. On a side note, did you ever install MS Windows iso with a system running on a CPU with SSE3 extension? Wuuuahhh thats fast :)
This is why I'm happy that MS might be distributing Win7 on USB drives - install will finally take a reasonable amount of time.
Re: VirtualBox 3.0 Released
#20Excuse a newbie... is it worth trying Ubuntu on Mac with VirtualBox? What should I know? (-: Please don't flame me. I might like ports as much as apt, if I knew it better. :-)
VirtualBox on the Mac is very nice. A respectably small download, an easy install, a pleasant GUI, it feels very polished and in my light use, both featureful and stable. Yes, try it.
Does anyone have any experience with how VirtualBox performance compares with VMWare?