This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!

VirtualBox update brings improved performance and 64-bit support

Posted by: Anonymous [ip:] on October 09, 2008 02:42 PM
Low quaility article I must say, not pointing out much but with flaws. The author seems to have slightly less clue on some topics.

About adding vboxuser, it's usually a package manager's job to add a new user, Ubuntu did that by default... so, don't know what's the problem, unless you are installing it by hand and manual should say to add it yourself, and you just should.

Also others pointed out, but why on earth do you need "at least" 4GB to run a Vista guest? Please run it once with 2GB of host RAM and claim it.

And then, it seems it's "beyond" the author's understanding, but it's quite obvious the guest needs some kind of drivers to talk to the host to have folders shared... so, that's where Guest Additions come in, among other useful features like mouse integration. Don't know what the big fuss was about just to enable shared folders, it was easy as pie.

Again, author blames that Guest Addition not being an ISO image, but what the VBox manual wanted to say was that it does act as an ISO image "inside" guest..., so, from the guest, you see the Guest Addition as a mounted CD to be used. No, it's not a separate ISO image download from VBox site =p

Also, it is NOT paravirtualization... Where did the author pull out the word to describe VBox is just confusing.

Read the first few paragraphs and you see VBox is not the one.
Also, while the term "hypervisor" describes anything that would run a guest OS according to Wikipedia, I'm more leaned to seeing the term where it's a thin layer between the hardware and the guest OS', instead of a host OS' application.

Also talking about USB device support just because a mouse worked means nothing like others pointed out, mouse is virtualized as a mouse device, not as a USB device to start with.

And lastly... what kind of flaming is "Parallels is best"? Has the author even tried VMware on Windows/Linux/Mac to start with? S/he hasn't even mentioned a single fact why it's better/best/bestest as blindly written.

More useful article would at least mention stuff like, shared folder not having good performance on Mac OS X host and using sshfs instead to the host would solve the problem and such. And introduce the VirtualBox community forum (, so people could go and get their problems solved.

It's a lengthy article and starts out good on the first few paragraphs, but this is not a good article. At least check on facts, then hopefully add some useful insights than putting your own little preference as a shut off comment in the last section.


Return to VirtualBox update brings improved performance and 64-bit support