Untitled

?

Fuck off, just dual boot

Go drink some bleach, shit for brains.

VMware

I am the truth, fear me loser

QEMU

Botnet vs stallman

They both have their strengths and weaknesses. I, personally, have no preference, and I'm using Workstation Pro, fully licensed. I'm not even gonna respond to the flurry of autistic assaults this comment is invariably going to create.

QEMU
E
M
U

Does VMware perform any better than VirtualBox? I get shit performance on VirtualBox no matter how many resources I allocate it.

Bortual Vox has nothing similar to fusion. So winner is VMware

Sometimes, yes, sometimes, no. Sometimes, there's no discernible difference.

anything that makes you happy, user :3

ones an industry standard and one is an absolute joke

Hyper-V

Yeah.

VBox does *not* permit symlinks on/to a shared host drive (ok on the virtual drive). Don't know if this limitation is in VMWare or not.

>ones an industry standard
Yes, KVM and Xen are industry standards, vmware is a fucking joke.

Wypierdalaj Konrad xD

Not using docker

XEN

>xen is an industry standard
In which third world country?

Are there any valid arguments for and against? Because "industry standard" isn't an argument. It's a jewish scam.

They're both type 2 so they're both shit. Use whichever one has better documentation and community.

Can someone tell me why the FUCK virtual machines are so FUCKING shitty?

>have Ryzen 8 core PROCESSOR
>want to Virtual Machine
>Ubuntu is choppy as FUCK
>only uses 2 threads
>only 2D graphic accelerated

FUCK VIRTUALBUOX

>virtualbox
VMware Player (free) does not have these problems
Proprietary wins again.

Yo're too retarded to make proper use of a computer.
Go buy a mac faggot.

Have you tried setting up 4-6 threads and enabling fucking 3D drivers?

>enabling fucking 3D drivers?

it's greyed out in the settings.

Oracle a shit

Install them.

I just need to occasionally try a meme-OS or to run android for some shitty apps, so I'll just take the free virtualbox.

>have core iIdontevenknowwhichnumberbutitsinanultrabookand3yearsoldsoitsprobablyratherslow duel core PROCESSOR
>want to Virtual Machine
>CentOS is smooth as FUCK
>i don't know how many threads it used
>I dont' know if it was accelerated, but all animations worked

VIRTUALBUOX IT JUST WERKS

Maybe you're cursed, user? Did you do something bad?

Fucking this
>install VirtualBox
>it installs Python software libraries (WTF!!!)
>it installs a network adaptor
>it installs some other shit aswell
BLOATWARE

Yes but there is a trick to make it work

You really are an idiot if you think virtualization is only used for muh gaymen. Back to Sup Forums with you.

As far as VMware goes, it really is pretty great to use. However, running XEN vm's is just as good if well configured, and keeps out nubs because its not as point and click.

...

i am using vb so far in linux it runs super good i succesfully installed arch and gentoo want to try qemu later but still not sure how it works

Do you even have a fucking job you useless faggot?

VMWare

read the manual

Good luck getting Oracle VBox to work on Ubuntu.

I've got several linux VM's running on a Win10 box Kali, Ubuntu etc.

Did have some problems with drive encryption, but for the most part really happy with it.

If you faggots are having issues you're probably not configuring your VM's properly.

This computer is a shitty old i5 like 6 years old.

works for me

>CPU designers add emulation and lot of ram support to their chips to run many OS at same time
>Stupid brainlet keeps using dualboot.

:D right?

I'm honestly surprised you managed to install Ubuntu given the fact that you are too dense to figure this out.

Werks just like a hardware install, here, ding dong. Watch a youtube tutorial or something. Even Pajeets have figured this out.

I usually just make a bootable flash drive for different operating systems, have tons lying around. But the one (and only) time I used a VM, virtual box was complete shit. I couldn't even use it, it was so slow. VMware was like a fresh install of an OS. This was a few years ago on a window 8 machine with 4gb RAM, though. Anyway, virtual box was shit, while VMware was 10/10

>installs stuff for it to work
>BLOATWARE

I like both, and both have some cryptical stuff.
I just installed lubuntu and fedora on Worsktation free and both times the OS did not configured any SWAP partiotions, so the guests ran like fucking slugs, and a crapton of disk I/O.
Making Shared folders work on Virtual box is such a fucking chore.
I also felt Vmware kinda slower than Virtualbox providing the same resources. Also Virtualbox Workstation free is so fucking basic that doing stuff like allocating fixed size preallocated disks is needlessly cumbersome.
Virtualbox Video support is shit, tho.
See... they have ups and downs

>Virtualbox Workstation free

I use VirtualBox from time to time when I need to run some specific software in a sandbox or an old OS. It works fine for my needs, and is super easy to set up.

Don't have any experience with VMware so I can't compare them.

VMWare workstation is also free if you have less than like 10 VM's on it.

Try it, i use both professionally and far prefer VMware in their ecosystem. ESXI is just super comfy, and shit is great when nothing is wrong. With virtual box, you get mostly the same features, and there is nothing really that you couldn't do in virtualbox, so why use the proprietary tool anyway right?

At home I run QEMU/KVM and it works fucking Fantastic.

qemu-kvm

VMWare. Unless you're braindead.

Vbox, because it's open source, works almost as well, and easier to move between host oses.

>tfw vbox fucked up my host OS(windows)'s network stack

Sorry man. It's what you get with running windows

QEMU/KVM with Virt-Manager

No Loonix memes: it's been objectively proven that QEMU/KVM in the Linux kernel is the fastest virtualization method on the planet. AWS is switching to QEMU/KVM. VMware is an IT meme and Vbox is just a learning tool for students.

user, use QEMU/KVM.

At the very least: regardless of which virtualization method you use, without GPU pass-through your experience will be lacking. And of course, QEMU/KVM via Virt-Manager is the best documented case of GPU pass-through.

eh sometimes the OS just doesn't support your hardware

I'm using Vbox on the desktop and KVM on my dedi.

i am vbox:
>fucked up my host OS's network stack
>vm are slow af
>has easy to use GUI(yes its pronounced "gee you eye",not "gooey")

vmware:
>noticeably faster than vbox
>industry standard
>more options
>cannot use touchpad to scroll in vm on my computer

pretty much the same,but vmware is a bit better

everything on Sup Forums creates autism

On the enterprise side, VMware shits all over OVM

Hyper-V is objectively terrible compared to any serious hypervisor (Xen, KVM, ESXi).

i used to have the problem on ubuntu too. Did you turn off secure boot on your bios? vbox wont work and most linux boot loaders dont work unless you turn it off.

>(yes its pronounced "gee you eye",not "gooey")
I say both

...

vm's on virtualbox work just fine for me. no noticable slowdown, but you have to use guest additions on each vm. But honestly thats not a real problem for me

...

> doing linux kernel development on your host
are you a fucking retard?

usb video devices don't work (os sees it but programs don't get any output or get device not initializing error) under virtualbox. usb scanners don't work too. same devices work fine under vmware.

found the retard who cant into VT-X

hab fun inconveniencing the fuck out of yourself switching between two operating systems while i can do it seamlessly through my desktop

video games don't run that well in a vm if you don't setup gpu passthrough in it. I am way too lazy to do that so I dual boot arch and win 10. have i said that i use arch yet? because i use arch

Was going to install arch but got lazy so I just use manjaro.
Im pretty comfy rn in manjaro, but ill still install arch, but just so I know I can do it, now im too lazy to set another os as my main one

vmware for work
parallels desktop for fun

docker and containers bro.

using VMs for anything other than multiplexing servers is deprecated.

it's literally vendor lock-in to the max tardo.

at least the other solutions try to work in a way that makes it remotely possible to interchange them.

Use QEMU/KVM
It is THE fastest for CPU virtualization.

The QXL GPU drivers are nice though but little in the ways of 3D accel. Paravirt fits here nicely.
As soon as there's a widely supported VM GPU driver multiplatform every other VM solution is dead to me.

seems reasonable I wouldn't want to game in a fucking VM and there is something pure about running a clean non VM GNU/Linux isn't there.

This. AWS going KVM is the death knell for Xen. If you're stuck with a Windows host Hyper-V is the way to go, even for Linux guests.

The one thing VirtualBox still has is decent USB passthrough, and even that is barely useful as nobody wants to deal with Oracle's licensing.

>As soon as there's a widely supported VM GPU driver multiplatform

Dream on dude. Maybe some enterprise VDI stuff will eventually become usable to hobbyists, but it won't ever be good enough for gaymen. It's PCI passthrough forever if you need that.

>go to company for job interview
>yes hi, do you have any experiance in VMware ?
>b-but mr.stallman s-said ... m-muh freedom
Sup Forums eternally btfo

It all depends what you're using it for. I have 2 different use cases: work, and gaming. For work I want something I can tab in and out of easily that overlays its windows onto my desktop. For gaming I obviously want GPU passthrough.

QEMU/KVM is the only choice for GPU passthrough, since the other 2 can't do it. QEMU doesn't have any "seamless" desktop integration though. But running more than 1 VM solution at once is a generally bad idea so I use it for work anyway and get by with hackier stuff like per-window VNC.

VBox has worse "seamless" mode than VMware. It puts all the guest OS's windows into a single window with the desktop cut out as transparency. This can make some host-side shadow effects ugly, breaks alt-tab and any taskbar like thing you may use to switch between windows.

VMware's "unity" mode is excellent. It individually cuts out each guest window and maps it onto the host. It can even remember parts of the window that are currently covered up to make stuff like Mac's Expose feature work near seamlessly with it. But sadly they discontinued it for Linux guests or Linux hosts, so it only works on Windows guests on Windows or Mac hosts. So unless you can use an old VMware Workstation 11 or equivalent Player version, which is not officially compatible with current Windows 10 hosts (i.e. it works fine but appears to leak kernel memory very very slowly as best I can tell), better use VBox if you care about guest window integration with Linux.


Another nail in VMware's coffin is lack of TRIM support. Configure a VBox .vdi disk or a QEMU qcow2 correctly --requiring manual config editing in both cases (why the fuck isn't this the default)-- it will free blocks from the disk file on the host if the guest TRIMs them. This means that space from deleted files in the guest is seamlessly and automatically recovered on the host. Meanwhile in VMware land you have to fill all blank space with zeros, shut down the VM, and "shrink" the disk.

I have worked at 4 tech giants now and all of them used VMware. Sorry, but it's as if free translates to bad in the industry

I use kvm/qemu/virt-manager on a headless gentoos box flawlessly. Have 10 VMs, running Debian and gentoo.

That being said, why the fuck does it have 3 different names compared to VMware? Can somebody eli5 the difference between job duties of KVM, qemu, and virt manager?

VMware is far superior to VirtualBox.

First off, you can't restore a snapshot in real-time on VirtualBox. That alone puts VMware leaps and bounds ahead in terms of functionality.

Plus, you still can't drag/drop from host to guest in VirtualBox, which is stupidly retarded.

First off don't ever say eli5, while I don't give a shit tribalist cunts here will focus on the fact you used a reddit term and nothing else.

Anyways, QEMU-KVM is the core technology/code and virt-manager is a front end, or GUI for this QEMU-KVM.

Basically you know how you can have an OS that's just a terminal/shell then you install a GUI? Same principle.

>dual boot
It's de wae.

>configuring all applications twice
>maintaining duplicates of said configurations

>xfce4 aint hard
>neither is grub
>neither was win7
>What's "Partitioning & Disjoint Sets"

>VMware. It puts all the guest OS's windows into a single window with the desktop cut out as transparency. This can make some host-side shadow effects ugly, breaks alt-tab and any taskbar like thing you may use to switch between windows.
>VMware's "unity" mode is excellent. It individually cuts out each guest window and maps it onto the host. It can even remember parts of the window that are currently covered up to make stuff like Mac's Expose feature work near seamlessly with it. But sadly they discontinued it for Linux guests or Linux hosts, so it only works on Windows guests on Windows or Mac hosts. So unless you can use an old VMware Workstation 11 or equivalent Player version, which is not officially compatible with current Windows 10 hosts (i.e. it works fine but appears to leak kernel memory very very slowly as best I can tell), better use VBox if you care about guest window integration with Linux.
>Another nail in VMware's coffin is lack of TRIM support. Configure a VBox .vdi disk or a QEMU qcow2 correctly --requiring manual config editing in both cases (why the fuck isn't this the default)-- it will free blocks from the disk file on the host if the guest TRIMs them. This means that space from deleted files in the guest is seamlessly and automatically recovered on the host. Meanwhile in VMware land you have to fill all blank space with zeros, shut down the VM, and "shrink" the disk.

wow thanks for the explanation

There's a dearth of desktop-oriented QEMU based emulation.
GUI frontends for QEMU exist, but they don't come close to VMware Workstation and VirtualBox in terms of usability.
Simple features like toggling clipboard sharing are missing.
Libvirt even requires restarting the VM to toggle clipboard sharing.

Only problem ive had with VB is the 17.10 Ubuntu audio would go to shit every 2 minutes.

>yes its pronounced "gee you eye", not "gooey"
Fucking this. I want to strangle people who say gooey

The objectively correct pronunciation is "goo-ee-in-ter-face".

Also of note: ease of use. In my experience VMware gives the easiest learning curve while VBox presents more options you can play with.

Right now I use both frequently as I described above -- I have the current VBox release on a new laptop and VMware Workstation 11 on an older one I'm still migrating stuff from. I primarily use VMs on these laptops for work: a rather specialized Linux based dev environment. Both laptops run Windows 10 for the host OS because of hardware compatibility and power management/battery life issues with Linux on these machines and because I'm lazy. I'm moving from VMware Workstation on the old one to VBox on the new one because I need easy switching between windows in my guest OS and ones in my host OS; Workstation 12 drops the feature and Workstation 11 doesn't work well with current Win10.

The most basic use of both is very easy. Create new VM, select the OS you're going to install into it, pick a few intuitive options like how much RAM and hard disk you want, and start it. The VM settings window is where the difference is.

VMware's VM settings window is more intuitive and has fewer gotchas. Most options do not conflict with each other, and potential problems are explained well. For instance switching between BIOS and UEFI is a simple checkbox, with the selection of emulated chipset and so forth all done for you behind the scenes based on that and your OS selection.

VBox's presents more options. For instance you can limit the CPU usage of a VM. It also has more options for hard disk and NIC types, including SATA and SAS disks, and paravirtualized NICs. However there is more potential for selecting conflicting options like UEFI boot on PIIX3 chipset. It does a pretty good job of warning you about these things, but it still takes more time to figure out what is and isn't compatible and which option you should choose.

KVM is the actual VM manager inside the Linux kernel. It handles running the stuff inside the VM and keeping it separate from other VMs and the host OS. It uses Intel VT-x or AMD-V to run unprivileged parts of the virtual system and trap the parts that access hardware and so forth.

Qemu handles those hardware accesses and privileged instructions by emulating hardware and running instructions that can't be run directly in a VM in its own x86 emulator. It also emulates a screen and optionally (poorly) accelerated graphics.

Qemu-kvm is a special build of Qemu that uses KVM for real virtualization instead of running everything in Qemu's own slow x86 emulator.

Libvirt is a library for managing and launching Qemu-kvm and Xen (another VM manager) VMs. It uses XML files to describe the VM hardware configurations, whereas Qemu is launched with command line options that tell it the hardware to use each launch.

Virt-manager is a GUI for libvirt that gives you some graphical settings windows, wizards, and a console window built into itself instead of Qemu being in its own window.

You can use libvirt without virt-manager by using the virsh command line utility, but you'd better like writing XML if you want to make a new VM with that. You can use Qemu-kvm without libvirt, and that actually gives you more options, but you'll probably want to put your command line options in a script to launch your VM. And you can use Qemu without KVM, but it's slow, faster than Bochs but still painful if you're running any OS from the last two decades.

same thing on Ryzen 5, you literally just have to use vmware instead.