| 1 |
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:01:34 +0100 |
| 2 |
"J. Roeleveld" <joost@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Tue, November 22, 2011 11:47 pm, William Kenworthy wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> <snipped> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> > YMMV ... VB is stable and rarely if ever breaks, app and modules |
| 9 |
> > "just work" - performance is as good as vmware |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I actually found VB to have better performance. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> When using virtual machines, I tend to run multiple simultaneously. |
| 14 |
> VirtualBox can handle more on similar hardware the VMWare. |
| 15 |
> The settings for the VMs (harddisk size, memory size) are identical. |
| 16 |
> For video-settings, as they generally tend to run server |
| 17 |
> applications, I really don't care for those and the basic is |
| 18 |
> generally sufficient. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I notice this entire thread has carefully steered around ESXi |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Now there's an interesting product, with a truly fascinating licensing |
| 24 |
and pricing model. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Alan McKinnnon |
| 30 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives