If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
VirtualBox 4.3.20 Arrives, Still No Sign Of VirtualBox 4.4
Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
- it still needs a proprietary compiler in order for the BIOS to be built (OpenWatcom),
- it still recommends proprietary guest additions and extensions, coming in binary-only form.
I'm fed up with qemu. The GUI's for it are outdated and/or minimal and I've tried lots of different command-line options, but I can't seem to find the right ones to give me uncorrupted video above 800x600 and reasonably fast disk access. It seems like it's one or the other.
I'm fed up with qemu. The GUI's for it are outdated and/or minimal and I've tried lots of different command-line options, but I can't seem to find the right ones to give me uncorrupted video above 800x600 and reasonably fast disk access. It seems like it's one or the other.
I'd like to get into qemu but I always felt it was really "sloppy" to get into. Hundreds of settings are optional, and you get lost in the ones you actually need. Then something performs like crap and you don't know where to look to make it work better. QEMU has a lot of potential, and it's interesting since it is a complete emulator (unlike VB which is just a VM), but I don't have the patience for it. I'm fine with command lines or config files but sometimes you need a good GUI to help point you in the right direction without spending hours on research. GUIs (for configuration) are potentially slower to use but they ensure the job is done right.
If virtualbox had more dedicated attention and GPU passthrough support, I think it would be a lot more popular. I like how VB just "gets to the point", and its advanced options are very easy to configure.
Last edited by schmidtbag; 21 November 2014, 04:28 PM.
I'd like to get into qemu but I always felt it was really "sloppy" to get into. Hundreds of settings are optional, and you get lost in the ones you actually need. Then something performs like crap and you don't know where to look to make it work better. QEMU has a lot of potential, and it's interesting since it is a complete emulator (unlike VB which is just a VM), but I don't have the patience for it. I'm fine with command lines or config files but sometimes you need a good GUI to help point you in the right direction without spending hours on research. GUIs (for configuration) are potentially slower to use but they ensure the job is done right.
If virtualbox had more dedicated attention and GPU passthrough support, I think it would be a lot more popular. I like how VB just "gets to the point", and its advanced options are very easy to configure.
"While virt-manager does a very good job as a virtual machine management software, its very much tailored for system administration and virtual machines. Boxes on the other hand is targeted towards typical desktop end-user who either just want a very safe and easy way to try out new operating systems or new (potentially unstable) versions of her/his favorite operating system(s), or need to connect to a remote machine (home-office connection being a typical use-case). For this reason, Boxes will not provide many of the advanced options to tweak virtual machines provided by virt-manager. Instead Boxes will focus on getting things working out of the box with very little input from user."
"While virt-manager does a very good job as a virtual machine management software, its very much tailored for system administration and virtual machines. Boxes on the other hand is targeted towards typical desktop end-user who either just want a very safe and easy way to try out new operating systems or new (potentially unstable) versions of her/his favorite operating system(s), or need to connect to a remote machine (home-office connection being a typical use-case). For this reason, Boxes will not provide many of the advanced options to tweak virtual machines provided by virt-manager. Instead Boxes will focus on getting things working out of the box with very little input from user."
"While virt-manager does a very good job as a virtual machine management software, its very much tailored for system administration and virtual machines. Boxes on the other hand is targeted towards typical desktop end-user who either just want a very safe and easy way to try out new operating systems or new (potentially unstable) versions of her/his favorite operating system(s), or need to connect to a remote machine (home-office connection being a typical use-case). For this reason, Boxes will not provide many of the advanced options to tweak virtual machines provided by virt-manager. Instead Boxes will focus on getting things working out of the box with very little input from user."
Seemed simple enough, but I only tested it out in fedora a bit.
I have enjoyed using Gnome Boxes for simple, uncomplicated and quick setups. I used it recently to test a package on various distributions and was able to quickly and easily get everything set up for testing.
And I was able to use USB devices off the bat with no funny business. So Gnome boxes was really handy for a 'dead-simple' program. It's also got a very pleasant GUI. Really showcases good GUI design.
Comment