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

Virtual Box 5.1

virtualbox.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–65 of 65 posts

Re: Virtual Box 5.1

#61

Post by gaius »

frostmatthew wrote: post #25
MichaelGG wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VMware seems to have mostly abandoned Workstation. The team was fired. They even encourage you to no longer use their actually-working binary tools, instead telling you to use the often-broken-it-seems open source versions. Fortunately for Windows hosts, the new Linux personality for NT might be good enough for dev work. Still sucks for people that want to use VMs in a more serious way.

> VMware seems to have mostly abandoned Workstation. There were just updates for Workstation[1] and Player[2] less than two months ago. > The team was fired. The team was replaced, and not simply to do only maintenance patches: "They’ve got a great surprise lined up for Q3, something very interesting for Q4, and something very big for H1."[3] [N.B. I work for VMware, though not in End User Computing] [1] http://pubs.…

The team was replaced

That's a weird turn of phrase. Are they still working there or not?

https://blog.chipx86.com/2016/01/26/a-tribute-to-vmware-work...

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/vmware...

Re: Virtual Box 5.1

#62

Post by garaetjjte »

mkesper wrote: post #30
nickjj wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed the same thing. VMWare (at least in my experience) runs a GUI in Unity mode at pretty much the same speed as native for xubuntu guests. I/O performance over shared folders is really good in VMWare too. The only problem is VMWare has abandoned Linux guests in Unity mode for newer releases of VMWare, which likely means you'll be stuck on 7.x and running older guest versions until the end of time. For me, Virt…

Wasn't 64 in 64 a config issue? Enable VT-X?

No. https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/4032

Re: Virtual Box 5.1

#64

Post by nickjj »

garaetjjte wrote: post #62
mkesper wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't 64 in 64 a config issue? Enable VT-X?

No. https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/4032

This 7 year old comment disturbs me: "A lot of work for questionable usefulness. Definitely very low on our priority list.".

This looks like a clear case where the people developing the product don't actually use it in real life. As a developer and ops person I would say this is very likely the highest priority thing right now because it makes their product unusable for anyone who needs to spin up a VM within their Linux based dev VM.

Post reply on HN