Arabia2tech

I thought I would revisit the virtual machine front to see if VirtualBox had progressed any since my last look (VMware vs. VirtualBox Jan '08).  My test system was an ASUS P6T Deluxe V2, Intel i7 940, 12GB DDR3, Raptor 300GB drives, and Vista x64 SP1.  VMware version 6.5.1 build-126130 and VirtualBox 2.1.4 were both installed on my C: drive and their respective images and virtual files located on D:. I usually don't give much merit to synthetic benchmarks, but I thought I would start with that to see if there were any significant changes from my previous test.  I installed SiSoftware's Sandra onto a clean host install of WinXP SP3 to both virtual systems. I ran Sandra's performance index benchmark several times.  Although the numbers differed slightly each time, the results were pretty much uniform. The big change from my previous test was the disk speed.  VirtualBox has made huge improvements in disk performance since the 1.5 versi

الفرق بين برنامج  VMware وVirtualBox الكثير يتحدث ويقول ان احدهما هو الاسرع والاخر هو الابطأ ويقولون ان هذا مجانى  وذاك غير مجانى وهذا به خدمات كثيرة والاخر ليس به خدمات وهذا اكثر ملائمة من الاخر وهذا يدعم كارت الصوت بينما هذا لايدعم الا الاساسى وجميعنا نتحدث عن خبرات شخصية ولا نستطيع ان نقول الافضل ولكن ف  هذه التدوينة سوف نجد انها تحتوى على تقييم 9/10 وقد تكون الافضل -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VMmare and VirtualBox are both virtual machine software suites for x86 and x64 computers. They allow you to run a "virtual" or guest operating system (OS) inside your main (host) OS. For example you could run Debian Linux as your main OS while running a complete version of Vista in a separate window on your desktop. Additionally, the guest system can comprise of different hardware. You could create three virtual hard drives and two optical drives on your virtual computer. Currently, the top t