Linked by snydeq on Wed 16th Dec 2009 20:13 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy takes an in-depth look at VMware Workstation 7, VirtualBox 3.1, and Parallels Desktop 4, three technologies at the heart of 'the biggest shake-up for desktop virtualization in years.' The shake-up, which sees Microsoft's once promising Virtual PC off in the Windows 7 XP Mode weeds, has put VirtualBox -- among the best free open source software available for Windows -- out front as a general-purpose VM, filling the void left by VMware's move to make Workstation more appealing to developers and admins. Meanwhile, Parallels finally offers a Desktop for Windows on par with its Mac product, as well as Workstation 4 Extreme, which delivers near native performance for graphics, disk, and network I/O.
Thread beginning with comment 400085
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I think...
by Moochman on Thu 17th Dec 2009 11:30 UTC
Moochman
Member since:
2005-07-06

VMware should really release a VMware Desktop product at the same price point as Parallels Desktop/VMware Fusion product for Mac. Most Windows users don't need all the flashy developer features of Workstation. And it's kind of ridiculous that they have an awesome, cheap Mac product but their Windows equivalent costs twice as much....

Reply Score: 2

RE: I think...
by Slambert666 on Thu 17th Dec 2009 12:10 in reply to "I think..."
Slambert666 Member since:
2008-10-30

VMware should really release a VMware Desktop product at the same price point as Parallels Desktop/VMware Fusion product for Mac. Most Windows users don't need all the flashy developer features of Workstation. And it's kind of ridiculous that they have an awesome, cheap Mac product but their Windows equivalent costs twice as much....


I agree 100%, the price for workstation is way to high. They should make a version for windows at the same price point and same feature level as fusion.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: I think...
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 17th Dec 2009 17:01 in reply to "RE: I think..."
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Yeah, I think they really don't want to sell too many copies of workstation. The more consumer oriented you become, the higher your support costs are. They see their future on servers, in enterprises, not on Grandma or even "power" users desktops.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: I think...
by bogomipz on Thu 17th Dec 2009 15:39 in reply to "I think..."
bogomipz Member since:
2005-07-11

But for Windows you have VMware Server, which is free!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: I think...
by BluenoseJake on Thu 17th Dec 2009 20:51 in reply to "RE: I think..."
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

But for Windows you have VMware Server, which is free!


Except that vmware server sucks. I hate that web management console, it's slow, it has no context menus, and I've had to reinstall vmware 3 times this year because all of a sudden I couldn't reach the damn server. Somehow, either vmware or Apache is corrupting it's config file. Nobody needs a full blown Apache + Tomcat installation to manage VMs.

VMware Server 1.x was a great product, 2.x blows, and it's all about the management console. That's why at home I'm now using Virtual Box and on Windows Servers, it's Hyper-V (It's free with the Win2k8 Server license)

Reply Parent Score: 3