VMware vs VirtualBox vs QEMU?

[Sunnz]

Just wondering how these compare?

Performance wise? When I tried VMware I always had to install VMtools on the guest OS, which is a bit of pain if they haven't got it working the the guest OS you want to install.

Features wise? Can it boot from an existing partition? Can it boot from bootcamp?

Any other difference between these?

[Bloodfen Razormaw]

VMware is far superior to the others from a technical perspective. It has the best feature support and performance. QEMU has the advantage of being free software. Traditionally the kernel module required for QEMU to compete on performance was proprietary but it was recently freed. VirtualBox doesn't have VMware's speed or features, and it isn't free either.

[MRiGnS]

VirtualBox doesn't have VMware's speed or features, and it isn't free either.

It's free and open source

[Bloodfen Razormaw]

It's free and open source

The only version that was freed was crippleware. Even the proprietary version can't match VMware's features, with what features it has removed it is very unimpressive. It's practically trial software.

[steven8]

The only version that was freed was crippleware. Even the proprietary version can't match VMware's features, with what features it has removed it is very unimpressive. It's practically trial software.

Wow, what features aren't there in VirtualBox. It's the only one I've tried, and it works great for me. I'm very happy with it. I know the personal version is the free one.

[MRiGnS]

well the proprietary version is free to use for personal usage.

vmware has no open source version only the free vmwareplayer and server. these are crippled.

Wow, what features aren't there in VirtualBox. It's the only one I've tried, and it works great for me. I'm very happy with it. I know the personal version is the free one.

If you've installed it via the binary you got all features. the binaries are the proprietary version which is free to use.

the open source version lacks some features but has to be compiled of tarballs

Closed-source features ¶

The following list shows the enterprise features that are only present in the closed-source edition. Note that this list may change over time as some of these features will eventually be made available with the open-source version as well.

    * Remote Display Protocol (RDP) Server 

    This component implements a complete RDP server on top of the virtual hardware and allows users to connect to a virtual machine remotely using any RDP compatible client.

    * USB support 

    VirtualBox implements a virtual USB controller and supports passing through USB 1.1 and USB 2.0 devices to virtual machines.

    * USB over RDP 

    This is a combination of the RDP server and USB support allowing users to make USB devices available to virtual machines running remotely.

    * Shared Folders 

    With the use of Shared Folders, users can share directories on their host system with guest systems.

    * iSCSI initiator 

    VirtualBox contains a builtin iSCSI initiator making it possible to use iSCSI targets as virtual disks without the guest requiring support for iSCSI.

[H.E. Pennypacker]

The only version that was freed was crippleware. Even the proprietary version can't match VMware's features, with what features it has removed it is very unimpressive. It's practically trial software.

I am not sure where you're getting all this, but you should take into account how well VirtualBox has been working for many of us. I can't even tell of a speed difference between running Windows XP under VirtualBox, and running Ubuntu (of course having VirtualBox on top of Ubuntu).

It is so fast, I seriously can't tell the difference between running XP itself on its own hard drive, and running it under VB. I am not saying that VB is fast. I am saying I notice no difference in speed.

I am very pleased with the speed.

As far as features, VB has everything I need. Does it run XP, and does it run it well? Yes. Sounds like it includes everything I need. See...we all have different needs here.

[Bloodfen Razormaw]

I am not sure where you're getting all this, but you should take into account how well VirtualBox has been working for many of us. I can't even tell of a speed difference between running Windows XP under VirtualBox, and running Ubuntu (of course having VirtualBox on top of Ubuntu).

It is so fast, I seriously can't tell the difference between running XP itself on its own hard drive, and running it under VB. I am not saying that VB is fast. I am saying I notice no difference in speed.

I am very pleased with the speed.

As far as features, VB has everything I need. Does it run XP, and does it run it well? Yes. Sounds like it includes everything I need. See...we all have different needs here.

Try using it in a production environment and see if it is still fast enough. Home users don't need fast virtualization. On the other hand, virtualization is very important to businesses (which are the primary target for virtual machine software) and VirtualBox is not nearly fast enough for a production environment. It is much slower than QEMU, and a mile behind VMware. Just because it works well for limited purposes doesn't mean its the better for more intensive tasks, or even the best for its own task. VirtualBox simply has no reasonable niche. A performance-conscious user can get many more features and optimal performance from VMware. A user who wants a free software solution can get the same from QEMU. And then there is VirtualBox, which lacks features like 64-bit or SMP guest operating systems, misses some hardware support entirely, and has no 3D acceleration support, yet also only provides a subset of functionality freely. Considering one can get a better virtual machine without licensing issues out of QEMU, or the best virtual machine with many of the same licensing issues out of VMware, there isn't much place for VirtualBox.

[maniacmusician]

VBox, works perfectly for me. While Bloodfen Razormaw may be right about it not being the leader in production environments, we have to consider that it is the newest of all three of those products, so there's a lot of work to be done on it. Personally, I've experienced significant performance increases with VirtualBox as compared to VMWare, so I've let go of VMWare in favor of VBox. Plus, it's small, simple, and doing pretty well on features considering their recent startup.

So for me, VBox wins out.

[miggols99]

Tried VMware, but it was slow. Didn't want to use Virtualbox, because I'd had to build from source. So I looked at Qemu. All I needed was a VM for winXP, nothing else much, and was easy to set up. So I choose Qemu.