On 02/10/12 15:42, Tony Cowderoy wrote:
Otherwise, there doesn't seem to be that much in it. VBox has a nice point-and-click front end, which saves me from the horrors of scripting Windows. The basic KVM set up on Linux is very lean without a lot of extraneous GUI tools that you don't need. I guess it's up to you which you prefer.
VirtualBox also has plenty of commandline tools (I switch between them and the GUI a fair bit depending what I want to do). Indeed I believe that VirtualBox can be installed on a headless (GUI-less) server, which is what I will probably try to do.
BTW, I think there are some tools around to migrate between the two.
Indeed there are but converting is a biggish job (needs a fair bit of spare disk space and takes a long time) so there needs to be a compelling reason to "upgrade" to KVM. At the moment I think VBox is looking most promising.
Does anyone else have experience of both? I'd be really interested to hear if you have.
Ditto. Benchmarks on VBox 4.0 beta that I found online showed it to be faster than real hardware because it wasn't obeying the virtual O/S disk syncs which isn't good, but I assume that was fixed in later versions (latest is 4.2). I just haven't found benchmarks (haven't looked all that hard tbh).
Mark -- Mark Rogers // More Solutions Ltd (Peterborough Office) // 0844 251 1450 Registered in England (0456 0902) 21 Drakes Mews, Milton Keynes, MK8 0ER _______________________________________________ Peterboro mailing list Peterboro@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro
