Who cares. Why use sub par Type 2 virtualization with DKMS modules when you can use built+in world class, industry standard, Type 1 hypervisor with Qemu+KVM and Virt-Manager? Already has clipboard sharing with qemu-guest-agent.
Because they are for different use cases. I use QEMU+KVM on desktop for games and 3D CAD software, because of its undeniable performance advantage. But on work laptop, I use VirtualBox to test my software on different platforms. On VirtualBox it’s relatively easy to initialize a VM, configure network, file sharing and device passthrough, and its snapshot feature allows me recreate the same environment for troubleshooting
I totally agree with you on the Linux side. However, I first got into Linux by using it in Virtualbox on Windows. In the Windows world, as far as I know, it’s the easiest-to-use free-as-in-beer1 hypervisor, so long as UEFI support has improved since I last used it.
1: I say this because of the non-libre extension pack.
Hyper-v is bundled with windows now and is just as easy to use as virtualbox (slightly easier for windows guests since the drivers are bundled in the os)
I teach a class where I use VirtualBox. Students commonly use Windows or Mac. I use Linux.
It is very handily to use VirtualBox where, if I demo something, the same steps will work on the student machine. It is also nice for documentation if you want to show a screenshot.
I have never used the “extension pack” for this so it would be fine. Educational use seems to be permitted regardless.
Ok so I guess I am the stupid because I always assumed kernel-level virtualization meant that you were limited to guest OS’s that used the Linux kernel. I was drawing incorrect connections to Docker
I think it should work with some version of the Q35 chipset, if not PC should work. But Wine might be a better option if you just want to run some old version of office (or frankly just use LibreOffice)
That’s using the externally developed Cyberus Technology backend though, like I mentioned. As mentioned all over this thread using extensions is rife for license abuse issues.
Who cares. Why use sub par Type 2 virtualization with DKMS modules when you can use built+in world class, industry standard, Type 1 hypervisor with Qemu+KVM and Virt-Manager? Already has clipboard sharing with qemu-guest-agent.
vbox is easy. qemu is kinda frustrating to use sometimes, although virt-manager makes it a little easier
Virt-Manager provides a complete UI, with a four step wizard to creating a VM, how is vbox any easier?
Vbox will create a bridge with my wifi card (I’m a laptop user with no option for a wired nic in the host).
I’ve never been able to get kvm to do that and haven’t found any working instructions online that a simpleton like me can follow
Create the bridge with Network Manager advanced config, voilà!
Because they are for different use cases. I use QEMU+KVM on desktop for games and 3D CAD software, because of its undeniable performance advantage. But on work laptop, I use VirtualBox to test my software on different platforms. On VirtualBox it’s relatively easy to initialize a VM, configure network, file sharing and device passthrough, and its snapshot feature allows me recreate the same environment for troubleshooting
I totally agree with you on the Linux side. However, I first got into Linux by using it in Virtualbox on Windows. In the Windows world, as far as I know, it’s the easiest-to-use free-as-in-beer1 hypervisor, so long as UEFI support has improved since I last used it.
1: I say this because of the non-libre extension pack.
Hyper-v is bundled with windows now and is just as easy to use as virtualbox (slightly easier for windows guests since the drivers are bundled in the os)
I teach a class where I use VirtualBox. Students commonly use Windows or Mac. I use Linux.
It is very handily to use VirtualBox where, if I demo something, the same steps will work on the student machine. It is also nice for documentation if you want to show a screenshot.
I have never used the “extension pack” for this so it would be fine. Educational use seems to be permitted regardless.
Sir or Madame, this is a Wendy’s. You’re in the Linux com here.
Virtualizing Windows 10 for various binbows-only work stuff
Virtualizing Windows XP to run Office from before it started sucking
Why would these not work in KVM exactly?
Ok so I guess I am the stupid because I always assumed kernel-level virtualization meant that you were limited to guest OS’s that used the Linux kernel. I was drawing incorrect connections to Docker
TIL
Yeah virtualization and containers are very different things. That said virt-manager can be used with LXC as well :)
For XP, the machine KVM presents as may be too new, but that isn’t an issue with non-virtualized QEMU.
I think it should work with some version of the Q35 chipset, if not
PCshould work. But Wine might be a better option if you just want to run some old version of office (or frankly just use LibreOffice)Doesn’t VirtualBox use KVM if it’s available?
I like
VBoxManage. Any crazy thing I’ve ever imagined doing with a VM it’s already supported.So, to answer your question - I use VirtualBox because it does everything I want and I’ve never had a reason to look elsewhere.
No, VBox does not use KVM unless you use some off brand backend, which is an extra layer of complexity and software you must install and manage.
Absolutely everything you might want to do with VBoxManager is going to be available via virsh and the multiple libviet utilities.
Not using Type 2 hypervisor would be a good one. Not being beholden to Oracle’s shitry licensing schemes is certainly another.
That’s using the externally developed Cyberus Technology backend though, like I mentioned. As mentioned all over this thread using extensions is rife for license abuse issues.
I think VBox is more user friendly? Virt-manager would need a GTK4 (?) update and a few UX improvements.
Virtual manager requires a lot less clicks. It also uses libvirt so you can run VMs in the background and on startup.
If you want a better UI look into other clients.