Wine vs VMWare or VirtualBox
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Abe Mar 16, 2008 8:17 AM EDT |
Helios,
I wonder why you chose Wine over VMWare or VirtualBox for a new user? I don't have much experience with either approach and I am looking into VMWare or VirtualBox now for one of the IT mangers at the company for testing purposes. Any one has elaborate experience with both and would like to share the pros and cons of each? From what I have read about both, I believe Wine still have more issues. Wouldn't it make more sense to use the less problematic approach, especially for new users? No matter what happens with a VMWare/VB install, you always can rebuild a new hosted Windows. I seems to me it is much easier to manage and support. |
| azerthoth Mar 16, 2008 8:27 AM EDT |
Abe simply put, wine lets you run a single application just as you would any other app on your computer. VMware/VB requires not only the installation of a whole seperate OS bringing up that environment in all its bloated glory just to run a single app or two, but also requires the blocking of large chunks of system memory dedicated exclusively to the VM. As well as, if you are bringing up XP in a VM then you still also need a legal key to use XP. Using VMware/vbox to run a single app or two is like swatting flies with a sledgehammer as they dont run apps but whole OS's only. |
| Abe Mar 16, 2008 8:43 AM EDT |
Quoting:As well as, if you are bringing up XP in a VM then you still also need a legal key to use XP..Thanks azerthoth, I understand that. My main point was about which approach is more reliable and offers more capabilities and features but less cumbersome for a new Linux users ? |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 16, 2008 9:15 AM EDT |
I think that the overhead of a second installation within the virtual machine is a good thing to do without if WINE will do the job. That's getting to be a smaller and smaller "if" all the time. |
| azerthoth Mar 16, 2008 9:16 AM EDT |
With the addition of wine-doors the use of winders .exe or .msi files becomes nearly native in experiance and use. Up to and including putting icons on your desktop for your windows programs. Also with wine you can take advantage of graphics acceleration either opengl or dx9 which neither VM system can do (VMware can, but functionally might as well be listed as not). Basicly with wine, for the one or two apps, the resource footprint is lower and functionally you are unaware that you have "left" the linux environment. Or did I misunderstand again? |
| tracyanne Mar 16, 2008 12:48 PM EDT |
@Abe, I'm using VirtualBox, it has some nice features like the ability to run widows with out a desktop, so that the applications appear to be running on the Linux desktop (the Windows task bar can be made to sit at the top of the screen and hide when not in use). I've got one of my virtual desktops assigned to be the Windows desktop - you have to set the VirtualBox or VMWare window to be forced to open on one specific desktop, othewise it follows you around from desktop to desktop and generally gets in the way. The only real issue I've had with VB is installing the Guest additions, it's not as convenient as the VMware method. |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 16, 2008 3:47 PM EDT |
> to run widows with out a desktop,... Is that part of the non-OSE version? I can't find a setting like that in the VBox-OSE. |
| tracyanne Mar 16, 2008 5:10 PM EDT |
Quoting:Is that part of the non-OSE version? I only run the OSE version. |
| jacog Mar 17, 2008 7:29 AM EDT |
Same as tracyanne here, running WinXP under VirtualBox for some stuff in the desktopless mode. Virtualbox is much more "new user" friendly than VMWare in my opinion. It installes easier, and setting up VMs is a breeze. Bob_R: The option you are looking for is called "Seamless Mode", and you will find it under the "Machine" menu of the virtual machine. Can't recall, but I think it only works if you installed the "Guest Additions". I am running version 1.5.0 here. ( And I am looking at the "About" window now... it's cute! ) |
| Abe Mar 17, 2008 8:07 AM EDT |
Thanks guys for the valuable input. Taking the advice from Tracyanne and Jacoq, I will start with VirtualBox first and VMWare 2nd. I know Wine could be more on the lighter side, and would make more sense if one needs to run only a few Windows apps, but I am still not sure it will handle many of the windows only applications like VB & VMW can. Remember, I am looking for a desktop option that can handle enterprise Windows applications that have no equivalent on Linux. I am trying to avoid any first bad impression. I believe VB & VMW can do a better job at this time. |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 18, 2008 5:55 AM EDT |
> Can't recall, but I think it only works if you installed the "Guest Additions" Ah! So I need to find Guest Additions for WinXP installed. Thanks. I was wondering what benefits that would give. "Seamless Mode". Consider it logged. |
| jdixon Mar 18, 2008 6:20 AM EDT |
> Remember, I am looking for a desktop option that can handle enterprise Windows applications that have no equivalent on Linux. I am trying to avoid any first bad impression. I believe VB & VMW can do a better job at this time. No doubt. The downside, as others have mentioned, is overhead and needing a license for Windows. I agree with the others that VirtualBox is a leaner install, and probably better for a single user. VMWare Server may be better for an Enterprise environment, as it has the hooks to integrate with VMWare's system management tools, which the Enterprise may already be using. |
| rijelkentaurus Mar 18, 2008 6:23 AM EDT |
Quoting: I agree with the others that VirtualBox is a leaner install Not sure about RAM requirements, but VMWare Workstation took about 400mb of disc space on my Windows work laptop, VirtualBox only took 35mb. What a difference!!! |
| jacog Mar 18, 2008 6:28 AM EDT |
Agreed on that point also. I was amazed by the small size of it by comparison. |
| rijelkentaurus Mar 18, 2008 6:41 AM EDT |
I guess we shouldn't be amazed...almost without fail, proprietary = code bloat. |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 18, 2008 8:28 AM EDT |
Just a note, to anyone who reads this thread that hasn't done this already. To install VirtualBox Guest Additions on virtualized Windows: On the main window of the running VM, select "Devices" menu, there is a line item "Install Guest Additions". This downloaded a CD image (very small, by the duration of the download) which was then mounted within the VM and G.E. was added. A reboot of the VM, and the first two things I made sure work are non-trapping of the mouse, and resizing of the screen to something better than 800x600. I'm still running the OpenSourceEdition on the Linux host, so USB may not be working, but by Cromm VirtualBox has just gone up several notches in user-friendliness in my opinion. Too bad they were bought by Sun, but the _why_ becomes more obvious. |
| rijelkentaurus Mar 18, 2008 1:16 PM EDT |
Quoting: Too bad they were bought by Sun Better than being bought by a Microsoft lackey like Xen was (Citrix). I am hopeful that Sun will make something of VB that can start to compete with VMWare's higher end products. |
| thenixedreport Mar 19, 2008 12:06 AM EDT |
Yeah, like adding the ability to use Direct3D and OpenGL. That would be cool. (If it would mimick a 3DFX card, that would be even cooler... hey! VirtualPC's virtual video card could do DirectDraw, so why not 3D as well?) |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 19, 2008 3:36 AM EDT |
Because DirectDraw can be implemented efficiently in software. Direct3D cannot and needs the real hardware. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!