VM Ware or Virtualbox? What do you use?

Understandable. I guess I'm lucky and have never had an issue with VirtualBox, and it was the first Hypervisor I ever used. So I just stuck with it.

I like this.

I've only ever seen Virtualbox used as a window within an OS installed directly on metal. Like you boot up Windows 10, open the Virtualbox application, and then you can run VMs within Windows.

vSphere, I believe runs independently of an OS? Is that correct? If so can Virtualbox work the same way where it's a hypervisor directly on the metal independent of a host OS?

Type 1 Hypervisors are independent of OS.
Type 2 Hypervisors run inside an existing OS.

VirtualBox is a Type 2

Thanks, that clears things up. I don't know much about virtualization, but trying to learn more about it.

yup, vSphere runs as part of ESX/ESXi, which is a type 1 hypervisor (bare metal) like said

Yes vsphere is the has it's own OS that uses a micro kernel that initializes all the necessary virtualization shit and the interface which then you can install many VMs that can use anything in the machine directly like a gpu without need for pci passthrough bullshit.
Kinda of a bitch to set everything properly at the beginning tho but once you get the hang of it it's neat.
You will need a good system tho don't run it on a shitty pc with no ram, etc.

i'm dumb and didn't even address the virtualbox thing. virtualbox can't work the same way afaik, virtualbox is hosted.

vmware because virtualbox has not added nested virtualization despite it being an issue for a literal decade (if you dont believe me: virtualbox.org/ticket/4032)
i understand that virtualizing vmx and svm isn't that easy, but to hold off on it for that long is a literal fucking joke

VMware. I don't mind Virtualbox either though

EXSI is a type 2 not a type 1

VMWare to play around, qemu/kvm if I need to run an always on VM

>ticket opened 9 years ago
>w-w-w're working on it
typical open sores that can't get shit done while VMWare is just perfect

Hyper-V, since it comes with Windows.

I'm genuinely interested. Why nest a VM when you can just spin another one up?

VM Ware.

It's what professionals use. No reason not to use it if you're interested in real virtualization.

99% laziness, 1% maintaining the hostguest communication channels.

I thought the "true virtualisation" crowd used KVM?

VSphere gives you very easy ha, ft solutions, resources reservation, live migration and so on. Only con is prices. If you want to use lacp, you have to buy enterprise plus license.

That 1% is the real reason. Elaborate.

Proxmox, like a real man.

>solutions
Does anyone else's brain automatically power off when they hear/read that word?

vmware

t. vmware employee

I think I'm going to have a heart attack from the total shock. I don't think I'll survive if you tell me MS employees tend to use Hyper-V.

VMware, it's easy to find a key online and it just works.

>Less bugs
It can't even handle resolutions out of the box.
It's a JOKE

if virtualbox had a more current virtual video hardware and fix that problem with usb scanners i'd use it.

Attached: 1529454583975.jpg (1336x887, 109K)

i just type spinup debian and i have a fully working debian install, with the password and ip address emailed to me kek

VMware > Qemu with KVM > VirtualBox

I run my current OS I'm posting from in ESXi also. It's nice being able to switch between virtual machines and sandboxes easily, specially on a multi monitor configuration.

No, it's a hypervisor with it's own kernel and drivers that runs on bare metal. It's closer to metal than any Linux kernel based hypervisor.

Hyper-V since it has the best integration with Windows.

Literally go read about what you just said. Let me flip the tables for you.

Linux with KVM is it's own kernel and drivers that runs on bare metal. It's closer to metal than any ESXI kernel based hypervisor.

Having a kernel, meaning having an operating system, means its not a type 1 hypervisor.
A kernel talks to hardware for the operating system of which, for example, Xen does not fall into since dom0 is also a guest and has to manage the CPU and IO management.

KVM, for a different example, uses the Linux kernel to provide virtualization the same way that EXSI does.

fpbp

B-but I use them all. Now I'm considering moving VASA to 3Par.

Proxmox does this all for free.

How about support?

Support is paid however the forums are normally enough unless you are doing something quite weird.

90% of the companies I find not using exotic enterprise solutions go with VMware. That's what I learned to use.

Please read what a "Type 2 hypervisor" is before spewing out such bullshit.
KVM is a kernel module to access hardware level virtualization features from userspace. No, your Debian distro with KVM is not a type 2 hypervisor.

ESXi IS the kernel, the only modules it has are drivers. The virtual machines are windows to actual hardware running in the kernel, not userspace tasks talking to a kernel via a kernel module in user space.

t. KVM/Qemu user for years with some ESXi usage experience.

No, EXSi has a kernel.

funny, this looks like linux commands to me.
kb.vmware.com/s/article/1010993

>You will need a good system tho
such as? how many cores? ram? etc

Hyper-V on my Windows™ 10 Pro, I'm not retarded to use third party shit to virtualize autistic OS's.

VMWare
I used Virtuabox for a few weeks but the performance was trash. It felt like I was remoting into a desktop.
VMWare is butter fucking smooth and assure from only operating at 60hz on my 144hz display, you cant tell it's virtualized.

both

Use vmware if you want to virtualize shit inside your main OS or EXSi if you want to straight out virtualize everything including your "main" OS

I use both. Neither is really any better at everything than the other.

>Implying VMWare isn't also free. Unless you're on MacOS at least.

vmware workstation pro on windows 10, /w crack

neither, ESXI is a dumpster fire. the best option for a hypervisor is Xen, KVM, or BHYVE.

if you actually managed production enviroments this would be common knowledge, ESXI is for homelabbers.

>Needing crack.
>Not using just the 10 different serials that always work and every user uses on Jow Forums.

>ESXI is for homelabbers and no pros like me
>Said user from his riced animu arch leenokz battlestation.

Bait.
ESXi is one of the most widely used hypervisors here, unlike Hyper-V, especially versions 5 and under. Maybe because its free version is capable enough.

Of the two? VirtualBox has done everything I've needed it to for free.
ESXi is all I use now though.

fpbp

I used VMware Workstation for a couple of years but it's a type 2 hypervisor that breaks every couple of kernel upgrades because it's only maintained by a couple of pajeets despite costing hundreds and it can't even do some decent scheduling. When I allocated all 4 cores to a vm back when I had an i5 my host would choke due to the vm claiming all the resources because it can't schedule worth a fuck.

Nowadays I use KVM/QEMU and it's great. It's a type 1 hypervisor while my desktop is still a normal host at the same time. Resource management is great, performance is great and to top it of it's actually free software.

ESXI fixes a lot of issues that workstation has but from professional experience I can assure you that it can also be a handful.

Virtualbox is a piece of shit though. I made the mistake of using it at a client once and never again.

Tried Linux Mint
>vmware
installer crashes
>virtualbox
screen literally looks like from a faulty GPU
Bottom line is: Linux is garbage

parallels

/thread

Well it highly depends on what you wanna do with it.

>Windows Desktop
VMware
>Linux Dektop
Virtualbox
>Windows Server
Both good
>Linux Server
Both good

Not him. You're a retard. I've managed ESXi deployments and KVM deployments. KVM is significantly better.

Just because you're a retard and do not know what you're talking about doesn't mean you get to "tag" something as bait.

FWIW the big co's use KVM. Get out of here fag.