Which is the lightest weight VM that runs under Windows?

P

pxc

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 22, 2000
Messages
33,063
I'm looking for a VM that can run under Windows that doesn't add a significant time to boot like VMWare (Player/Server) does. It has to be free, easy to configure and capable of supporting Linux, Windows versions (Vista support is not necessary) and Solaris client OSs.

Does anyone have a suggestion?
 
Define "significant" in terms of extra seconds to boot your machine, and also include that machine's specs.

Please elaborate on why boot time is your most important (or at least only listed) guideline.
 
You sure are demanding a lot from a free software. Fast, cheap, reliable. Pick two.
 
PTNL said:
Define "significant" in terms of extra seconds to boot your machine, and also include that machine's specs.
Click to expand...
I was being polite. VMWare is a pig. Otherwise, refer to the thread title.

Thx
 
I know VMWare seems to add a bunch of processes/services

Give VirtualBox a try
http://www.virtualbox.org/

Only thing I don't like about VirtualBox is that it doesn't support drag and drop between host and guest. Instead, to transfer files back and forth, you have to use shared folders. Unless that has changed in 1.6
 
VirtualBox ftw!

If all you want to run are Windows OSes in VMs, then VirtualPC 2007 does the job just fine. If you need more, want more, then VirtualBox fits the bill. Yes, it's not perfect, and no, it's not the feature-laden beast that VMWare is, but it's not the bloated freakin' resource pig that VMWare is either. When VirtualBox ain't running, it ain't running and that means nothing is left over - unlike VMWare which leaves what, 4 services running constantly regardless of it being in operation or not.

Once again, VirtualBox ftw... and it keeps getting better with each new release. Now that Sun owns it, hopefully they'll really give it a kick in the ass for development.
 
After using VirtualBox, I don't see a need to ever pay for client side VM software again.
 
pxc said:
I was being polite. VMWare is a pig. Otherwise, refer to the thread title.
Click to expand...
Referring to your thread title, that's something that a few minutes Google-ing could provide more technical analysis and comparisons. But I guessed that there may have been more involved than was revealed in the thread title or the post. So don't get trigger happy with the pompous replies when someone's taken an interest to help.

VirtualBox can probably meet your requirements for the guest OS's, give it a shot. Solaris is likely supported as well. If it's not, then VMware will.

Done and done.
 
I've always had good luck with Qemu on linux, supposedly there's an (early) windows port. I have no way to test how well it works though.
 
I was scanning this thread, and decided to try VirtualBox. It works good, except for some buggyness with my USB printer, and a Hardlock USB key I need for a software app. I need a VM that will work EVERY time.

VMware and VirtualPC 2007 have been mentioned. Anyone have a "review" of these? Or is there another one to recommend? It doesn't need to be a freeware app.

EDIT: I tried VirtualPC 2007, and it has no USB support.:mad: Dopes. This one is a no-go.
 
VirtualBox has USB support, not an issue. VMWare does also, but you pay the price with that bloat that comes along with VMWare.

As for it working every time. well, good luck with that. PCs are different every time you turn 'em on (unless you're using DeepFreeze or something similar) so, it's a crapshoot more often than not that the program you've come to depend on will work that next time you need it or give you more headaches than a workout at a Shaolin monastery doing headbutt practice on sandbags.

Ok, that analogy is a reach even for me... :D
 
I know VirtualBox supports USB, but it seems to be buggy. My printer seems to have calmed down, and has worked normally....but the usb hardlock key sometimes wont work without a restart or two........and now the serial port is acting up (I use it to communicate with my machinery at work) when it was fine the first couple of days. I wish all would work together.

EDIT: I also just checked out VmWare. Meh - Instead of spending $189 for it, I could just format the Vista workstation, and install XP so there would be no more compatibility issues.
 
i agree with what others have posted, VirtualBox FTW. It is still being worked on, so I'm sure your problem with the USB will be resolved eventually.
 
I'm surprised there aren't many VM options out there......unless someone can offer something else. For now, I guess I'll be using VirtualBox (too bad it doesn't do Win98 too).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top