why is vb so slow, and does anyone know if it is slow on all hosts? i use it on linux because it's free and (very) easy and reliable. but maybe i should be switching?
[edit: just poking around on the 'net, reading any benchmarks i can find, the differences don't seem to be that great between the two - seems to depend on the particular benchmark with the general view (my impression) being that virtualbox is easier to use but vmware being slightly faster on average.]
I can't answer your question about why it's slow in these tests, but I do own Parallels (7), and have used VirtualBox extensively.
Some background: I use Parallels for local testing of build-scripts that I use to turn up Rails hosting infrastructure. A "full stack" build script turns up some basic compile tools and utilities, Ruby 1.9.3, Apache, Passenger, and MySQL. All of this is built from a base snapshot: a Debian netinst installation with nothing but root and a non-superuser account. No other packages added or configured at install.
My scripts write timestamps at the beginning and end of the process. With "nothing" running on my host MacBook Pro, Parallels and VirtualBox both take within seconds of each other (around 14m45s) to build an app server, so for my usage, Parallels doesn't represent much of an advantage. I use Parallels for my hosts mostly because I'm familiar with it's configuration tools and supporting application config. I wouldn't spent the money on it unless you use one of the operating systems for tasks they demonstrated will run much faster.
Comments
why is vb so slow, and does anyone know if it is slow on all hosts? i use it on linux because it's free and (very) easy and reliable. but maybe i should be switching?
[edit: just poking around on the 'net, reading any benchmarks i can find, the differences don't seem to be that great between the two - seems to depend on the particular benchmark with the general view (my impression) being that virtualbox is easier to use but vmware being slightly faster on average.]
I can't answer your question about why it's slow in these tests, but I do own Parallels (7), and have used VirtualBox extensively.
Some background: I use Parallels for local testing of build-scripts that I use to turn up Rails hosting infrastructure. A "full stack" build script turns up some basic compile tools and utilities, Ruby 1.9.3, Apache, Passenger, and MySQL. All of this is built from a base snapshot: a Debian netinst installation with nothing but root and a non-superuser account. No other packages added or configured at install.
My scripts write timestamps at the beginning and end of the process. With "nothing" running on my host MacBook Pro, Parallels and VirtualBox both take within seconds of each other (around 14m45s) to build an app server, so for my usage, Parallels doesn't represent much of an advantage. I use Parallels for my hosts mostly because I'm familiar with it's configuration tools and supporting application config. I wouldn't spent the money on it unless you use one of the operating systems for tasks they demonstrated will run much faster.
I noticed that in the "computation" comparison, Vbox was tied with the others. That's what I care about.
So it seems like Vbox isn't as good at I/O and graphics. Like you said, vbox installs easily and works well.
I don't plan on switching even after reading this article.