[olug] VirtualBox?

[Adam Lassek]

No, the performance is similar to Virtualbox. I rank it third due to the
constant stability problems I ran into, and the lack of an integrated GUI.

On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:44 PM, Rob Townley <rob.townley at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Adam Lassek <adam at doubleprime.net> wrote:
>
> > That sounds pretty paranoid to me. GPL code can be forked, period.
> That's
> > a
> > basic feature of the license. It's also a lot of work, which is a
> > perfectly
> > good explanation why it hasn't been done.
> >
> > I've used every virtualization solution available in Linux, and would
> rank
> > Qemu a distant third in usability, stability and performance. YMMV.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tuesday 01 April 2008, Adam Lassek wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday 04 March 2008, Brady Cox wrote:
> > > > > > Anyone had any experience with this?  I'm installing Windows
> right
> > > > > > now.  Wish me luck.
> > > > > VirtualBox is anti-free software. (k)qemu works great and is free!
> > > >
> > > > This is not true. Virtualbox OSE is GPL2 licensed. Qemu can't hold a
> > > candle
> > > > to VB -- especially seamless mode.
> > >
> > > VirtualBox "OSE" is just a legal form of artificial restrictions.
> > > VirtualBox,
> > > complete, is not GPL2. The company also acts to prevent* any kind of
> > > developer community from growing outside of their employment, so they
> > can
> > > effectively close even the GPL2 code at any time without much risk of
> a
> > > fork.
> > >
> > > Basically, that GPL2 "edition" serves the purpose of killing off
> > > competition
> > > from free software like qemu.
> > >
> > > As far as a technical comparison between qemu and VirtualBox... qemu
> > > supports
> > > x86, ARM, SPARC, PowerPC, MIPS, and m68k-- including running an x86
> > system
> > > on
> > > PowerPC or almost any other combination. qemu also supports user-mode
> > > emulation, meaning you can run just one application instead of booting
> > an
> > > entire OS. VirtualBox has USB support too, but it is one of the
> features
> > > that
> > > is kept out of the GPL2 edition.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, VirtualBox does have "seamless" Windows support and
> a
> > > nice
> > > GUI. I don't use Windows, nor care overly much about GUIs, so qemu is
> an
> > > obvious win to me. Maybe those things are more important for you. But
> in
> > > the
> > > long run, I think it'd be far easier to add "seamless" + GUI to qemu
> > that
> > > it
> > > would be to rewrite VirtualBox's architecture to support the things
> qemu
> > > does.
> > >
> > > Luke
> > >
> > > * No, I don't have actual proof they are actively trying to do this.
> > > However,
> > > I have heard from developers that in effect this is the case. Also
> note
> > > the
> > > list of external contributors has a total of ONE person:
> > >        http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/List%20of%20Contributors
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > OLUG mailing list
> > > OLUG at olug.org
> > > http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OLUG mailing list
> > OLUG at olug.org
> > http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
> >
>
>
>
> Are you really saying that QEMU with the kqemu driver enabled takes a
> distant third when it comes to performance.  Have you verified kqemu is
> enabled with "info kqemu"?
>
> Tons of people have compiled qemu because it was made to be easy to port
> and
> compile.  If VirtualBox is hard to fork, i would guess only because
> impediments and lack of docs have been put up to make it hard.
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>