What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
66 Comments
- amenic, on 01/27/2009, -2/+33I like that VirtualBox is:
a.) Cross platform (the program works verbatim on Linux)
b.) Lets you run 64 bit guests from a 32 bit host (hardware permitting ala hardware virtualization)
c.) FREE, supports mounting of CD(DVD)-ROM images (bootable) as well as dynamic virtual partition volumes.
d.) Making the move to support 3d rendering APIs aka OpenGL through the VM. Although I haven't personally had an opportunity to test this I'd love to hear from those who have (VB 2.1+).
It's also a very easy and intuitive program to use. - Bviper, on 01/27/2009, -5/+36This article is *****, every single time I read a "review" of virtualbox I see the error with the .iso. Its not hard to understand how virtualbox handles the iso, you have to dismount it first, or turn the machine off in order to remove it from the list. Any other action will cause the VM to freak out JUST like VMware.
If you REALLY want a hassle with .iso files try VMware's ESX
The copy and paste synchronization appears to be working for him, just Mac OSX is freaking out.
As for USB devices, you have to turn the machine off and SPECIFY which ones you wish to connect. That way the VM doesn't just take over USB devices you do not want it to. It works very well and you'd have to be an idiot not to figure it out.
I will admit seamless mode is glitchy if you don't use it exactly as intended.
As for his other "bugs" I'm fairly certain its because he is using it on Mac OSX. I've used both Vista and Ubuntu as VM hosts with Virtualbox and have NEVER experienced any problems.
I swear I can't believe this piece of garbage was written. Virtualbox works great if you aren't retarded. Just because something is free doesn't mean it is inferior. - timbellomo, on 01/27/2009, -1/+19I'd recommend that you download it and try it yourself. I haven't run into most of the issues cited in the article. I've been using VBox for about a year (Ubuntu Host/WindowsXP Guest), and have had very few problems. USB had some permission issues that needed to be sorted on the host machine, but once I followed the help file on that, I've been running fine. My experience has been that VBox runs faster than VMWare -- anecdotal of course.
- clickwir, on 01/27/2009, -2/+18I think the biggest and best feature for 2.1 is the simplification of using the HOST NIC for the GUEST machine. No more manual bridging of connections and wondering why the GUEST can get webpages by the HOST cannot.
Via La VirtualBox - abbathdoom, on 01/27/2009, -5/+19I hope he filed bug reports on all these problems so the developers can fix them!
- haikuFU, on 01/27/2009, -0/+12This was probably the most piss-poor review I've ever seen written by ARS. Everything you mention above that works on Vista and Ubuntu hosts works fine for me on my OSX hosts.
For those that are put off by the ARS review and the USB support, it's not as bad as they make it out to be. In fact, I've had ZERO problems with it in the latest version. I've used it with digital cameras, CF readers, USB sticks, and a USB VAG-COM cable for ECU programming.
As far as speed goes, I think it actually runs faster than Parallels, though I haven't done any actual testing of this. But.... NEITHER DID THE REVIEWER. And then he spouts off and says it's way slower than other products. Did he turn on VTx support? Did he turn on SATA support? Both of those dramatically improve performance and are off by default.
I'm not volunteering to do a review, I have better things to do. But very little work went into this article. - Angostura, on 01/27/2009, -2/+10I've used it on the Mac to play with Ubuntu and try out the Windows 7 beta and I've not really had many problems. However, I think the review is pretty fair: I may not really come across any show-stopping bugs, but then again I haven't pushed it as hard as the reviewer - I haven't tried using any USB devices apart from a mouse/keyboard combo.
My advice - it's Free - take it for a spin. If aspecs of it make you grind your teeth, try VMWare or Parallels. - brianpeiris, on 01/27/2009, -2/+9I'm constantly amazed at how stable and usable virtual machines are.
I've used Microsoft's Virtual PC as a test environment before and now I'm using VirtualBox with Ubuntu as a host and Vista on the VM for development. It's rock solid and running at a decent speed on my 1.6Ghz Core Duo. - diskit, on 01/27/2009, -6/+13Yeah dude, it's MrBabyMan. Just about everything he submits gets to the front page by default.
- phphreak, on 01/27/2009, -1/+7Parallels and VMware come out with new iterations of their software every 2 months it seems, and each iteration costs $$$. What happened to 1 version every couple of years, with FREE updates?
- psion01, on 01/27/2009, -2/+7Wow. Mr. Girard had a lot more difficulties than I have with VirtualBox running under 64-bit Linux. On the other hand, he's throwing a lot more at it than I am. I needed to work with an Access database, and couldn't find any relief under Linux short of installing Windows and Microsoft Office. I spent days tweaking WINE with no luck. I found VirtualBox the day after they released a 64-bit version and couldn't be happier. It shares my network connections flawlessly, works well with my USB devices (including a flash drive with an encrypted partition holding the database in question), and doesn't seem to run slowly. Windows XP went on without a hitch, and in less than an hour from making the decision to try VirtualBox, I was editing my database.
VirtualBox isn't without its flaws. Seamless mode, which is apparently supposed to share the desktop between the host and guest, does very interesting things to my desktop and usually has to be terminated by shutting down the guest. This might be a conflict between Compiz-Fusion and VirtualBox, but since the application runs so well in non-seamless mode, I see no reason to fuss over it. And the method used to share files is rather limited ... sharing a pre-determined folder between Linux and Windows works, but I'd prefer to be able to drag and drop files to/from anywhere. - Shigglyboo, on 01/27/2009, -1/+5This article would never have made the front page without Mr. Babyman's legion of blind diggers. BURIED!!!
- Shigglyboo, on 01/27/2009, -1/+5+1
What is this crappy article doing on the front page anyway? Blind digging needs to stop! Anonymous submissions! Take away his fame and he'll stop! Then people will digg what's cool instead of digging as a favor... - theaceoffire, on 01/27/2009, -0/+4Then get a corporate version of Windows.
I personally like the hacked mini version on Pirate bay... Windows XP shrunk down to around 100MB. If MS would offer that, I would buy it. - amenic, on 01/27/2009, -0/+4You might want to look up the definition for "anal retentive"
Although my reference wasn't to literal speech I'm pretty sure the message comes across in the context in which I used the word. - fucter, on 01/27/2009, -2/+5I started using virtualbox after the old vmware server was just too buggy (not their fault, everything 'upgraded' around them) and the new versions were browser based (a stupid idea in my opinion.
virtualbox has some problems, i admit it. but i think i'm gonna keep on using it, its pretty good (still not as fast as vmware was though) - lkms, on 01/27/2009, -2/+5Works fine on windows and linux.
Also seamless mode is pretty cool. Only problem is that I can't access VM's menu bar with it enabled but perhaps I am missing some way to do that.
As of the USB, I had some problems too. My USB printer worked fine but USB software lock keys (GuardantStealth II) did not work, that is the software using them lockeed up and did not work even though keys were detected correctly. Unfortunately this is pretty big issue for me. - godzilla8nj, on 01/27/2009, -0/+3@ theaceoffire
It might be illegal for me to tell you to search PB for the mini Vista version, so I won't. *wink* - therightclique, on 01/27/2009, -0/+3I haven't tried VMWare, but Parallels makes me want to hit myself in the face with a hammer. So, until I learn to live with activating Windows almost every single time I use it (over the phone), I won't be using it for anything serious.
- lowtolerance, on 01/27/2009, -0/+2i've been using virtualbox for months now, and i haven't run into any of these issues. then again, i'm not running a mac, and i know better than to run 3d renders in the background when i'm testing a piece of software. i've used both the 32-bit and the 64-bit version, as well as 32-bit and 64-bit clients, and in my experience the 64-bit version worked just as well as the 32-bit version. networking worked for me without any configuration, although I did have to switch from the OSE to the Sun edition to get USB working, but if I had done my research I would have known this to begin with. I wouldn't base any decisions based on this review, as this guy seems a little clueless, if you ask me.
- bytor4232, on 01/27/2009, -0/+2Compiz-Fusion and VirtualBox do not play well together in seamless mode. I usually have to ALT-F2, metacity --replace before I try to go seamless.
- SPThom, on 01/27/2009, -3/+5I've been running VirtualBox on my 10.4 Mac since before Sun acquired it from InnoTek (chuckle), and have not had a fraction of the problems that this reviewer experienced. Granted, my demands are lower than this guy (I don't need cross-OS drag-and-drop, etc.) but basic things like VirtualBox choking on ISO images and stuff... I've never had these issues.
Anyhow, wanted to toss in a good review.
Web designers have modest needs for virtualization: Does IE7 open? Check. Google Chrome? Check. If your work, for some reason, demands heavy use of Windows applications... No, VirtualBox is probably not for you. But for web designers, who only need to check for browser compatibility, Virtualbox is a great little utility. - lowtolerance, on 01/27/2009, -0/+2if the program works exactly like it says it should, then i don't think he's too out of line using the word verbatim.
- inactive, on 01/27/2009, -2/+3Wondered why they were touting it as "VirtualBox 2.1 for Mac"... I've been using it under Linux since the 1.x releases, it's far snappier and as stable (if not moreso) than VMWare workstation. Truly a jump in performance and compatibility with the 2.1 release (particularly the networking).
But still, It's VirtualBox 2.1, not just for Mac... the author just didn't bother to test it on anything but his notebook. - mehan, on 01/27/2009, -16/+17mrbabyman = autobury
- theaceoffire, on 01/27/2009, -0/+1I had an issue with Seamless mode before, where if at least one window wasn't open then Compiz-fusion would start acting up.
^_^ Someone gave me a program that opened a 1px window in the upper right, and I set it to autostart with the virtual OS... a good work around.
If anyone else has this issue, you can grab it here:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=577897&am ... - shadow54682, on 01/27/2009, -2/+3I've been using Virtual Box for a while now, with Vista, Ubuntu 8.10, and BackTrack 3 installs all working without much problems. I did have a few problems with networking at first, but once that was figured out, Virtual Box is a great piece of OSS. The fact that it's free makes it 100x better in my eyes.
- Carlix, on 01/27/2009, -3/+4
buring because of author rather than story = autobury - twsmit, on 01/27/2009, -3/+4On windows I have had similar experience. VB is good for the basics but USB support is buggy and I never 100% stable.
- Herolint, on 01/27/2009, -0/+1I've been using Virtual Box for a while as well on a 64-bit Linux host. Contrary to the article, I didn't have any problems at all sharing files between the VM and the host filesystem either. It was pretty straight forward, I thought.
In fact, I had many more issues with VMWare's free server application than I did with Virtual Box. - rocor, on 01/27/2009, -0/+1I have to digg you up on this one. Sometimes I plug in a USB device when the Virtual machine is running, and no problem, other times I plug in the same device and have no joy to until I reboot the host machine. Overall I do like Virualbox, I prefer it to the first virtual machine environment I tried (Mokafive).
- RobotBuddha, on 01/27/2009, -0/+1How about TWO anonymous diggers! Virtualbox has worked great for me as well, under a linux host running a windowsxp guest. It's even fast enough so that I can watch fullscreen netflix streams with it. I've actually liked it a lot better than vmware, simply because it handles the kernel modules pretty much automatically. Where with vmware I feel like I'm usually stuck with an unsupported kernal that makes me have to patch their source code and recompile just to load the thing.
- godzilla8nj, on 01/27/2009, -0/+1I do not use VirtualBox as extensively as it was tested, but in the capacity I have used it (Ubuntu, XP, Win7 Beta) I have had none of the issues cited. I am using VBox on my Macbook now, but have also installed it on Ubuntu and XP without a hitch.
- JoelJ, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1Zero problems with either my Vista host or my Ubuntu host.
I especially use VBox with my Ubuntu host quite a lot, and the only problem I've had was USB support.
Sounds like the Mac version isn't as solid or something - rakeshishere, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1The only biggest issue i am facing... The rest doesnt matter so much to me
- Nephersir7, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1I love virtualbox. Having just one virtualization program for both Windows and Linux Hosts, with equal fuctionality is awesome. Also, they did add Win7 guest additions pretty fast (within a month), and USB support, while being tricky sometimes helped me plug my bluetooth adapter in the win7 beta where it worked out of the box (just like it always did in linux) to avoid Vista's messy driver problems. But I did run through a few bugs, such as not detecting the CD in my drive while my bluetooth usb adapter functionned, and couldnt boot with these, but overall its one of the best open source programs out there. (I hope Sun's recent layoffs wont hurt their awesome software development, because they are awesome contributors to the open-source software world)
- diskit, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1As good as an idea that is, it'll never happen.
I've gotten the distinct impression that digg's editors/moderators just happen to be the site's top users.
As such, I doubt they'd support anonymous submissions. Why would they give away their status and ability to make the front page without even trying?
Either that or they just keep giving us that passive aggressive BS about "it's just the internet" - pagamimi, on 01/28/2009, -0/+1i love vb
- haikuFU, on 01/27/2009, -0/+1This is the primary reason I switched.
- flibblesan, on 01/27/2009, -2/+2Ars based the article on a single port of VirtualBox, the OS X port, which is currently unstable. If David Girard wanted to write a fair review on VirtualBox then he should have reviewed the Windows version and, if possible, the Linux port.
- nossifer, on 01/27/2009, -2/+2I run Ubuntu on a MacBook Pro. I use VBox 2.1 on it, and love it. there are 2 minor issues you need to be wary of if you want to do this: do NOT use ACPI. (or the VM will freeze every now and then) and for sound to work, i think you use ALSA, or maybe OSS... if it doesnt work for you... just try the other. sorry to not remember....
other than that, flawless. I'd pay $20 for it if it wasnt free. No way would i pay for parallels/vmware. - Snarfy, on 01/27/2009, -2/+2I run Vista x64 .
I tried VirtualPC sp1 ... doesn't run linux. wtf should just call it virtual windows box
I tried VMWare ... 64bit drivers aren't signed? I have to reboot and hit F8 -> load unsigned drivers to use it? No thanks. I can't imagine this is still a problem but it was a pain when I first tried it.
VirtualBox ... works great, runs Linux, and it's free! - m85476585, on 01/27/2009, -2/+2I just installed VirtualBox 2.1.2 on my Macbook Pro with specs identical to the one used in the article. I had 1.6.something, but I never really used it since VMWare Fusion worked better for everything. I just installed Ubuntu 8.10 64 bit (I would have used 32 bit, but I already had the 64 bit iso). The install went well, and I have not encountered any major bugs. Compared to installing VMWare Tools, installing VirtualBox Guest Additions was easier, or at least less intimidating, because it didn't ask me anything or bother me with details like the fact that pre-built kernel modules are not available for my system. I just ran automatically and told me to reboot when it was done, which is fine. The Ubuntu loading screen seems to have some graphics glitches, but I haven't seen any once Ubuntu is running. The biggest issue I have had so far is that when the VM is running at full CPU, everything else on my Mac becomes extremely slow at times. VMWare does the same thing as it is eating memory, but once it has the memory it needs, everything becomes completely responsive again (for the most part).
VirtualBox has improved significantly since last time I tried it, and it seems to be quickly catching up to VMWare Fusion. I will keep using Fusion since I already have it and it is a bit more stable, but if I had to recommend something to a friend, I would definitely recommend trying VirtualBox. - swrostmore, on 01/27/2009, -2/+2I trust ArsTechnica more than I trust anonymous diggers, sorry.
- Arghblarg, on 01/27/2009, -0/+0I'm not within reach of my VirtualBox installed-laptop right now, but I think right-CTRL+HOME brings up a popup menu bar in seamless mode.. or was it right-CTRL+L? Anyway it's possible.
- RickyTheRiot, on 01/27/2009, -2/+2That's a stinker of a review, when it really didn't need to be. The Mac version of VBox might be a bit flakey but it's rock solid on Win/Nix.
As for the "bug" about the sound (ie: it's set to off as default) then really was the man just trying to find fault or is plain stupid. - cmost, on 01/27/2009, -1/+1I've been using VirtualBox on Linux since the 1.x releases and I think it works great! I used to use VMware and got tired of paying for it. I've not experienced any of the myriad problems this reviewer seems to be experiencing with the Mac version; perhaps it's just too new. Or, maybe the Mac version is just plain buggy. In any case, I can highly recommend VirtualBox 2.1.x to new Linux users who want to use Windows apps occasionally. The seamless mode is especially nice since it plunks the Windows taskbar across the bottom (or top) of the Linux desktop and Windows apps run side-by-side Linux's native apps. Even with full Compiz effects! Wonderful!
- f54280, on 01/27/2009, -0/+0I dumped Parallels because the new versions didn't really fixed the old bugs, upgrade is a pain, and I generally felt ripped off (performance is getting worse and worse -- don't know if it is a bug in the VM, upgrade of the OS or upgrades in product itself)...
Furthermore Paralells never replied to me about inquiries about the LGPL source code they used for their 3D support. No more money for them.
Free Software FTW. Even if it does a bit less things than the proprietary ones, it will not have its performance degraded, while sales spams you with messages urging you to upgrade to the next and better version... - samanthasquared, on 01/28/2009, -0/+0Thanks for this note, I am a web designer and I do often need to check how things look in IE, and was not willing to lay down the cash for other virtual machine hardware
- jonstafari, on 01/28/2009, -1/+1i dont believe this guy really knows much about virtualization, at all really. some of the features he complains about are already supported and working (ie: dragging applications/files between hosts->guests->hosts). virtualbox is great, plus its free - but so is vmplayer!
and the banter about esx hosts and other vmware products (esx 3/3i, vmserver) is nonsense. most people arent going to use these unless they're doing a lot of virtualization in their homes or networks. which i dont doubt to be the cast for some, but for normal usage, even with an esx in my home office, i still use vmplayer to run my vm's locally -- no problems.
bad article -
Show 51 - 66 of 66 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is