alternatives to vmware

Any off topic discussions should go in this forum. Post count is not increased by posting here.
FTP Access status is required to post in this forum. Find out how to get it
Forum rules
Any off topic discussions should go in this forum. Post count is not increased by posting here.
FTP Access status is required to post in this forum. Find out how to get it
Post Reply
saurabh
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 10:06 pm
Location: USA

alternatives to vmware

Post by saurabh »

what are the all of the alternatives to VMware, i know there is microsoft virtual pc...?

hjort
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 11:08 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Post by hjort »

Bochs, Qemu, and my favorite VirtualBox http://www.virtualbox.org/
My gaming machine: AST Advantage 6066d. Cyrix 66MHz 486DX. 4MB RAM. 512KB Cirrus Logic onboard graphics. Creativa Vibra 16 ISA. 520MB HDD, 3.5" FDD, 40x CD-ROM. MS-DOS 6.22/Windows 3.1

RentedMule
Donator
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:26 pm

Post by RentedMule »

Just to add my two cents...

VMWare is a virtualizer. Meaning none of your intructions are emulated, where as Virtual PC and Bochs are pretty much pure emulation.

ZSS9393
FTP Access
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: In front of a Thinkpad
Contact:

Post by ZSS9393 »

Virtual pc for Windows isn't an emulator. It's a virtualizer, like VMWare. Virtual PC for Mac, of course, is an emulator.
http://ubuntu.com
^Ubuntu 8. New installer. Why the heck didn't they do this years ago?

Xammer
FTP Access
Posts: 150
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 10:51 am
Location: Bucharest, CA

Post by Xammer »

There are also Bochs, QEMU, DOSBox (it can boot floppies), Flopper etc.

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

Parallels Desktop is also a virtualizer. Available for Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X (Intel).

LeoNatan

Post by LeoNatan »

Parallels is the best IMO. Fastest, and most compatible with Linux distributions out of the box.

thenico
FTP Access
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:13 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Post by thenico »

I use Qemu with KQEMU enabled.
The guest network card is bridged to host network card with this /etc/qemu-ifup·

Code: Select all

$ cat /etc/qemu-ifup
#!/bin/sh
echo Going to add $1 to br0 ...
sudo -p "Password for $0:" /sbin/ifconfig $1 up
sudo brctl addif br0 $1
I usually use these argument: -net nic -net tap -m 196 -serial stdio
It is not user friendly but i hate spend time with GUI.

mdogg
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 954
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 9:39 am
Location: My house

Post by mdogg »

On Windows, Virtual PC is a virtualizer
On Mac however, Virtual PC emulates the Intel CPUs and therefore is very slow. Virtual PC for Mac is only for PowerPC CPUs. This is why it has to emulate the CPU. If Microsoft weren't so stubborn and biased, we might have a good Virtual PC for Intel Mac that's free like the Windows version.

This is also why emulating the PowerPC CPU is slow as well. (PearPC)

Oerg
FTP Access
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:31 am

Post by Oerg »

I'd say Qemu, there are also some GUIs and Frontends out for it. VMware IMO does not have great driver support for older operating systems.

But, i'd go to Microsoft Virtual PC, because it's very fast AND it has hardware that is compatible with old operating systems, like the Intel 21140 NIC, where you can get DOS packet drivers, WFW Drivers for. This card is supported by all 32-bit OSs because they got the driver integrated AFAIK (not sure if this applies to OS/2, too.). S3Trio -> great support for Windows NT3.x and Windows 3.x. Sound blaster 16 also.

Sad that Windows 3.0 does not work without workarounds.

Greets
Oerg

EDIT: Qemu emulates also other varieties of CPU Platforms, like x86_64, PPC and so on.

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

Virtual PC has been substantially slower than VMware for me. Also, VMware's features are clearly superior to VirtualPC's. The fact that VMware is available for Windows, Linux/BSD and OS X is also a winner for me. You're correct about older OSes, though. For NT 3.5x, some drivers are available, but for Windows 3.x, for example...

Rhykin
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 1:15 am
Location: USA

Post by Rhykin »

Since no one posted the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison ... l_machines

Very useful (if you haven't seen it yet).
"I hear you say 'Why?' Always 'Why?' You see things; and you say 'Why?' But I dream things that never were; and I say 'Why not?'" --George Bernard Shaw

"You can't cross the sea merely by standing and staring at the water." --Rabindranath Tagore

blahsucks-two
FTP Access
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:21 am

Post by blahsucks-two »

I've heard it said that Virtual PC is better with older OSes, while VMware is superior with newer ones. Consider that:

Virtual PC has Additions for NT 3.51 and other older OSes, and its emulated video card is a relatively standard S3 Trio. In contrast, VMware uses a special SVGA-II card that doesn't exist in the real world. (Parallels supports OS/2 and some other old stuff too, AFAIK, but it's not free)

VMware has functional 3D acceleration to a point, as does Parallels. VMware also probably has more corporate support, as well as a larger community (unofficial VMware tools for various OSes exist, along with disk images for several Linux distros).

Of course, if you're not using Windows, Virtual PC isn't even an option (well, except for PPC Mac users, but it's undoubtedly the best offering on that platform). Both of them are solid products. As for Parallels, I think it's a little shady, but that's my opinion. Qemu and Virtual Box aren't as fast, but they're open and are easier to convert to and from.

Frozenport
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 1022
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:04 pm
Location: The Ephemeral between existance and non-existance: AKA "being"
Contact:

Post by Frozenport »

I like how VMware can do x64...
Image
Part Time Troll - HPC Enthusiast - Spelling Master - Old Fart

blahsucks-two
FTP Access
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:21 am

Post by blahsucks-two »

Does Virtual PC have multiprocessor support yet? I know it's in Virtual Server 2005, but support for that has been in VMware products for years. It's even in player..

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

blahsucks-two wrote:Does Virtual PC have multiprocessor support yet? I know it's in Virtual Server 2005, but support for that has been in VMware products for years. It's even in player..
AFAIK, no.

blahsucks-two
FTP Access
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:21 am

Post by blahsucks-two »

Also, in regard to older OSes -- I have Windows NT 3.51 and Windows 3.11 semi-working in VMware.

I found a bunch of drivers for 3.11 over here: http://vmware0.tripod.com/index.htm. The network card VMware uses is an AMD PCnet card, which isn't that hard to find a driver for. You can't use the built-in NT 3.51 one; you need to use an update from the AMD site.

In NT 3.51, I used the VBEMP driver for universal VESA graphics. There's a patch to the 3.11 SVGA driver somewhere.

There are also the free vmw, vmshrink, and vmftp available at: http://chitchat.at.infoseek.co.jp/vmware/vmtools.html - vmw does various things, including clipboard migration and mouse tracking. Vmshrink will compact the hard disk, and vmftp will access shared folders. They run in various OSes, including DOS and Win32 command line.

Skyfrog
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:45 pm
Location: United States

Post by Skyfrog »

This is not really an alternative to VMware but since we are talking about emulators I noticed that no one has mentioned MESS, it emulates several old PCs as well as dozens of other computers. Some work very well, others barely at all but it's worth looking into if you want to run very old software. CP/M, DOS and earlier though, it won't run modern stuff like Windows.

Personally I like Virtual PC 2007 the best, runs most everything I've tried on it from CP/M-86 to XP. I never could get OS/2 1.0 to work on it though (or any other emulator).

Post Reply