This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I don't think there should be a "yes" for qemu. Just take some usb printer and press on "print" and you'll get a bluescreen under WindowsXP as guest OS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.134.177.134 (talk • contribs) 15:23, August 1, 2007
i didn't read this page before adding colinux and user-mode linux
but i'll keep them on the main page...you can delete them if you want
we don't need to vote here this is a non-sens what we need is a clear definition of virtual machine...
mabe the fronteer is tigh between all the notions...
users are going on this page in order to choose a virtual machine ornvidia search information about...see comparaison of operating system or filesystem for reference...
so ,my idea is :
theses two categories will be merged into only one
in order to do this clasification i propose the folowing presentation: I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH TABS...PLEASE LOOK AT THE CODE IN ORDER TO KNOW WHANT I WANT TO TELL
(optional comparaison of the different general technologies(wrapper,virtual machine) showing what is diferent between all them)
(optional description of what is a "machine emulator")
Name | Creator | Host Processor | Guest Processor | Host OS | Officially supported guest OS | Guest OS SMP available? | Runs Arbitrary OS | Drivers for supported guest OS available? | Method of operation | License | Typical use | Guest OS speed relative to Host OS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bochs | Kevin Lawton | x86, x86_64, Sparc, PowerPC, Alpha, MIPS | x86, x86_64 | Windows, Linux, OS X, IRIX, AIX, BeOS |
DOS, Windows, xBSD, Linux | Yes | Yes | ? | Emulation | LGPL | Hobbyist, Developer | Very slow |
(optional description of what is a wrapper)
Name | Creator | Host Processor | Guest Processor | Host OS | Officially supported guest OS | Guest OS SMP available? | Runs Arbitrary OS | Drivers for supported guest OS available? | Method of operation | License | Typical use | Guest OS speed relative to Host OS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
wine | ??? | x86 | x86 | Linux,unix | Windows(win32 subsystem only) | ??? | ??? | ? | wrapper | ??? | run win32 apps under linux/unixes | ??? insert a % here |
And I propose to migrate this "Expert debat" to the Virtual machine page
But in order to better understand what a virtual machine is we need example that are present on the "Virtual machine page" but we could,in order to show well the diferences between the term, add a column and put inside "virtual machine" "wrapper",because technology is more precise and give infotrmation about the exact system that use the "virtual machine" and the use is too general
Another idea is explainig the difference under the title ""==wrapper==" or "==virtual machine== —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.241.20.196 (talk • contribs) 22:25, January 7, 2006
Would also suggest that a column to indicate whether vm's are portable to other physical machines would be useful, as some would feel that this is a major decision factor (i.e. never having to go through the pain of recreating all your virtual machines when upgrading hardware, etc). Several years ago, this would have been a deciding factor in favor of VMware (fully portability) vs Virtual PC (limited portability, same processor type only). Situation may have changed several versions on, but you get the idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.215.162 (talk) 22:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
The page says that the speed of UML is "Native** (some people says that it is faster than natively)". How's that possible, faster than native? IMHO UML is "Slow". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.192.228.162 (talk • contribs) 13:47, January 18, 2006
I notice that they both say "close to native" -- I was doing a quick bit of research here before deciding which one to use, and based on that I took Virtual PC because I have access to it through MSDN. Big mistake. I've just abandoned Virtual PC for VMWare because there is no way Virtual PC can be described as close to native (yes, I installed the extensions). It runs at a reasonable speed, but installing Windows, Visual Studio etc. takes HOURS, whereas in VMWare it was, well, close to native. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.101.44.115 (talk • contribs) 22:51, February 1, 2006
I have to disagree with this, I tried VMWare 5.5 and 6 today with Windows XP as a guest (I have XP as dual boot as well for speed comparison) and it was nothing like Native. The window rendering being slow didn't help either (yes, VMWare Tools were installed). Enverex 23:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Added notes on 3/23/2007 - I concur with above. VMware can be near native performance, but very frequently is not, especially in workloads with substantial context switching or I/O. Same with Xen. FWIW, mainframe z/VM row didn't have NPOV, and exaggerated the performance characteristics. jsavit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsavit (talk • contribs) 20:47, March 23, 2007
Within the table, some VM qualities are marked with red or green backgrounds, presumably to indicate that these traits are desirable or undesirable in an emulator. These appear to be set with the assumption that the user is looking for the "best" emulator, as though this were a product comparison. It should be more objective than that. If a reader is looking for a specific type of emulator for a specific project, some "undesirable" qualities may in fact be desirable, or meaningless, depending on the application. I would like to propose the removal of subjective indicators within the VM comparison. "Just the facts, ma'am." Fastolfe00 17:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
The page's name is nice and short but wouldn't the name Comparison of various virtualization and emulation tools be more descriptive? --unforgettableid | talk to me 04:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
should SSE-2 support be in the comparison table?
--DDDW 21:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
As the subject says.
UML boots a whole nother kernel and runs things usually from a loop device.
OpenVZ and Linux-Vserver both use the host kernel, and the host filesystem, employing a more "chroot" approach.
Just my tuppence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.49.124.107 (talk • contribs) 15:26, June 7, 2006
Historical information, to the best of my recollection and research --
Name | Creator | Host Processor | Guest Processor | Host OS | Officially supported guest OS | Guest OS SMP available? | Runs Arbitrary OS | Drivers for supported guest OS available? | Method of operation | License | Typical use | Guest OS speed relative to Host OS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CP-40 | R. J. Adair, R. U. Bayles, L. W. Comeau, R. J. Creasy (IBM CSC) | IBM System/360-40 (modified) | System/360 Basic | CP-40 | CMS, OS/360, DOS/360 | No | Yes | (none required) | Virtual Machine Hypervisor | Copyright Only | Research, Developer | up to 95% |
CP-67/CMS | Adair, Bayles, Comeau, Creasy, et al (IBM CSC, MIT Lincoln Lab) | IBM System/360-67 | System/360 Basic | CP-67 | CMS, OS/360, DOS/360, CPREMOTE | Experimental | Yes | (none required) | Virtual Machine Hypervisor | Copyright Only | Research, Developer, Production | up to 95% |
VM/370 | S. R. Newson, R. A. Seymour, C. Young, et al (IBM) | IBM System/370-VS (135/145/155-II/165-II/158/168) | System/370 Basic, System/370-VS | VM-CP | CMS, RSCS, VMREMOTE, any S/370 OS including itself | No | Yes | (none required) | Virtual Machine Hypervisor | IBM SCP, Copyright | Production, Research, Developer | up to 95% |
Dave Tuttle 19:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Dave Tutle knows whereof he speaks, as one of the original developers of CP/67 and VM/370. I would just quibble that the "up to 95%" lacks the balancing "as low as..." which could be experienced, especially with MVS guests before enhancements like shadow page tables. jsavit, 3/23/2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsavit (talk • contribs) 20:51, March 23, 2007
The earliest example I can think of was the IBM 1410 able to run in what was called by IBM "1401 emulation mode." These two machines were similar 6 bit character based machines with different address lengths.
Also, the SDS 940 and the DEC PDP-10 and their respective operating systems for the early time-share industry preceded the IBM 360/67 and the CP-67 OS in support for paging registers and address-space virtualization if I recall correctly. Halwyman (talk) 18:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
VM/370 is an open source virtual machine operating system. While for commercial purposes, zVM replaces VM/370 (as well as VM/BSE, VM/HPO, VM/XA, and VM/ESA) the latter is available and used (even on x86 and x86-64 hardware via an emulator) by individuals.
Please note on the above section, VM/XA and VM/ESA also ran on System/390 hardware before the release of zVM (this is not listed). Also note subsequent versions of VM (VM/XA and VM/ESA) allowed for defining virtual processors and hence guest operating systems to run in SMP mode.
--Bmoshier (talk) 11:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Since the table is so long, I like that the header row is repeated for readability. However, I missed this when I first read through the table because the header rows don't stand out against the data in the table well. How about we color-coat the header rows with a light-gray or similar color to clearly distinguish the column labels from the table data? --Pekster 04:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Readability is horrible - would it be better if X/Y axes were swapped? 203.113.233.59 22:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
The article does not realy explain the differences between the different virtualisations. Also, when I read that nearly every vitrtualisation is working at "native speed" or "near native speed", this makes the comparison rather useless and looks to me as if every product vendor has updated the material to make his solution look good so much, that the comparison looks rather useless. Also, what is the use to have x versions of VMware products in the comparison, when even basic products are missing or one could at least as useful also distinguish betwen XEN 2 and XEN3 or between Solaris Zones and Partitions?
As for the basic information, I think the article should explain that basicaly, there is a trade off between flexibility (by emulating more) and speed (which is gained by emulating less).
So for development and testing, as well as for a desktop machine where you just want to use some software form another OS or when you want to consolidate machines with different OS on one machines, the solutions with less speed and more options are better. This (especialy Desktop and testing) is also the world, where most virtualisation aproaches which are today popular in the Intel world come from (VMware, Virtual PC, Parallels etc).
However, when you host lots of standard enviroments (hoster, but also standardized enterprise server), you should take a closer look toward the OS virtualisation solutions.
194.138.39.53 15:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC) Kai Froeb http://kai.froeb.net
VMware technical FAQ states that running 64-bit guests in 64-bit hosts environment requires VT support. That means, cheap Core 2 Duo E4300/E4400 CPU's won't be able to run 64-bit guests at all (due to lack of proper segmentation in 64-bit mode). Is there any emulator which allows to run 64 bit guests on such CPU's with reasonable speed? Can QEMU or VirtualBox do that? QuestPC 03:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Software where I have started a discussion on reliable sources in the context of software articles and software comparisons. I am pointing this out because I criticised this software comparison for making unsourced, contentious claims about performance.—greenrd 12:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Just regarding the table itself: 1. it's too wide, 2. cells seems to be missing. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 14:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I think it is cleaned up enough now, so I am removing the cleanup request. CompotatoJ (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Can we please switch to HTML table markup? I just edited the table and I am disgusted as from how complicated it is. Much easier would be if we see the columns already in the markup like this:
blah | blubb |
--ThorstenStaerk (talk) 07:42, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I think there should be a column for 3D Acceleration support, as it seems it is a rather rare feature of Virtual Machines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.34.216 (talk • contribs) 05:18, June 21, 2007
Recently a new page Comparison of virtual machines features was created, that describes some additional features of virtual machine software. I suggest this is merged into this article. We could make it into two tables: one with general information, and one with features such as "Runs Arbitrary OS" and some of the features from the new article. – Chip Zero 15:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I merged the table into a new section. Someone may wont to look into moving some columns from the "general" table to other table, but at least all the information is on one page now. – Chip Zero 13:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
It appears to have been abandoned before it was at all usable... the list ...
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guss-hackers/
... seems to be almost exclusively spam for the last half decade. So I figured it didnt have sufficient Notability. --Treekids 18:47, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Several systems say they do paravirtualization, yet claim they support arbitrary guests. That seems to be contrary to the nature of paravirtualization. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.254.27.202 (talk • contribs) 0:55, 7 August 2007
Why does the last comparison table say No (red background) for "Can boot an OS on another disk partition as guest" regarding VMware Player ? I'm typing this a VM run by player, host is Linux running from one partition of an IDE disk and guest is Windows 2000 Pro installed on another partition of the same disk (aka "raw" disk). Yes, such settings can be tricky (and largely rewarding), for sure the Player runs them as well as Workstation. I'm not editing the table myself, for fear of messing with the layout; I think someone should correct that error anyway. -- 90.31.227.59 22:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC) Ninho
Hey, can someone explain me why jail is a "virtual machine" ?
I am FreeBSD user, and i am thinking it cannot be compared, because is only process/es separation facility not emulation of new kernel "instance".
It is chroot+additional_restrictions.
It should be deleted from this table, if not why "chroot" is not there ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.12.214.196 (talk) 23:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
If FreeBSD jail is not going to be removed, then the supported guest architecture entry should at least be changed to indicate that the "guest" operates under the same ISA as the host. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.239.235 (talk) 05:11, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
It would be nice if live migration capability of a VM was in the table. I know that XEN, OpenVZ and VMWare ESX are capable of live migration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.78.219.251 (talk) 09:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
This column seems to have no meaning. Of the 30 rows that specify "Yes," there seems to be a wide range of interpretation. One of them even has a "Yes" but lists only one OS that it can run!
If this column has meaning, it should be explained on the page somewhere so that it can be interpreted consistentlyby readers and editors. If it doesn't have any meaning, it should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.18.128.5 (talk) 18:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I noticed this missing column/info ("Runs Arbitrary OS") when I was wondering why the Host OS column for vmware is grossly inaccurate. http://pubs.vmware.com/guestnotes/wwhelp/wwhimpl/js/html/wwhelp.htm lists many OSes that are missing: MacOS (though Darwin is listed), OS/2, SCO. BeOS is a good example of an OS that VMware runs because it runs arbitrary OSes. Ref: http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:C-RNsvLywl8J:communities.vmware.com/message/719740%3Bjsessionid%3DF76FBD2F50EF4222D62249B4C1A7A11C+vmware+beos&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a . Ditto: Windows 7 (beta and RC, at least). I feel safe predicting I could get Trustix, SEBSD, OpenBSD, etc to run under VMware as well.--Elvey (talk) 21:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Need to include the newly released Oracle VM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreas Toth (talk • contribs) 00:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
What about seamless integration? See http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2007/09/05/screenshots-virtualboxs-seamless-integration/. I think that`s very good and worth to be listed as feature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.183.148.33 (talk) 13:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Compare maximum number of LCPUs per VM and total RAM supported. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pisapatis (talk • contribs) 13:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
You think it would be worth to make some site just with the theme comparisons of virtualisation methods?
Great work you done here! You know a forum or newsgroups for virtual machines in general? Like with sub forums for all the most important emulators?
Perhaps it should be noted that DOSBox runs slowly deliberatly. The current way it's written makes it sound like it's a bad thing it runs so slow. Jawsper (talk) 19:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
It is possible to use USB mass storage devices such as Pendrives or HD's, by mapping it to a floppy drive (B:). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.205.229.16 (talk) 15:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Now that the veridian hypervisor has been released as hyper-v and the RC0 release included with server 2008, is it time to mention it here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.124.224.116 (talk) 21:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree that Hyper-V (Windows 2008) has to be added to the band-wagon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pisapatis (talk • contribs) 13:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
We should write that the application "needs"/"does not need" administrative rights. --Ilhanli (talk) 20:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to see some mention of this, with e.g. VMware has the ability to convert Parallels and Microsoft VMs but not afaik the other way around. It's mentioned in the article, but not yet here. 87.165.198.178 (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I personally have been running colinux on a windows vista SP1 host for several months with no difficulties, though according to the official colinux website vista is still unsupported *shrugs* --Kuzetsa (talk) 16:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
There's a lot of content in this page and I feel like additional sorting would make the page a better read. So I suggest to change the layout in any manner available to make the difference between hypervisors & "virtual machines relying on an OS" more obvious. For example they could be grouped(sorted) together.It seems to me that these roles are completely different, even if some software solutions allow both. What do you guys think of this ? Am I mistaken on something ?
BTW, this is just a suggestion and maybe it's not possible to do this for some reason, that's why I'm here asking questions. 82.121.214.9 (talk) 12:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Hell, I have no idea how to create a table. But I have some knowledge I want to share. There are many different image formats, proprietary ones and documented ones. It's always questionable which emulator is compatible with which kind of images. Rather it's questionable which formats can be already converted into another format which what kind of tool.
I would like to see a table for these kind of comparison so we can add more and more informations later.
VMware:
VirtualBox:
Bochs:
Qemu:
VirtualPC:
Look at after the table, there is a load of garbage. At first look, I did not undesrtand where that comes from Porttikivi (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:43, 8 December 2009 (UTC).
It seems to me that needing Administrative Rights to install a package should not be counted as VirtualBox needing administrative rights.
Actually running VirtualBox and setting up new VMs is possible without being root/Administrator...
--Keeper of the Keys (talk) 17:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I believe that the listing for Trango Virtual Processors should be edited to be VMware Mobile Virtualization Platform since the buy-out of Trango by VMware (2008). I believe most information is still correct, although support for host CPU architectures other than ARM have been dropped. See the MVP homepage, the old Trango site redirects here now. In fact, there is no wikipedia article on MVP at all, and it is not listed under VMware Software. 193.128.61.237 (talk) 15:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Bochs is a virtual machine? I was thinking that he was a emulator.187.89.197.232 (talk) 21:26, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
where can i get information if a virtual machine can boot a physical OS as guest-OS?? Or is it "Can boot an OS on another disk partition as guest"? Then it should be renamed. --Txt.file (talk) 14:54, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't Plex86 be in this comparison? Algotr (talk) 10:03, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
I've added Avanti and FreeAXP to the General Information table twice in the past 24 hours, only to have them apparently removed. These are virtual Alpha emulators. I also moved VHDsoft to its correct location alphabetically. I am going to try a third time.
Bclaremont (talk) 20:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
So if I create FreeAXP and Avanti entries that describe the products, but do not advertise them, would they be acceptable? Would posting the product SPD's minus any marketing jive be okay?
Bclaremont (talk) 22:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Lots of information here is going out of date fast. We really need a rewrite.Jasper Deng (talk) 06:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)