For instance, VMware Player gets a functional boost when purchasing a commercial license of VMware Fusion Professional, which runs on Mac OS X as well as Microsoft Windows, Linux and other Unix-like systems. While both applications are free, both can be upgraded to premium packages as well. VMware Player, on the other hand, is only freely available for non-commercial usage. Oracle makes its solution available under version two of the General Public License (GPL), an open-source license that allows it to be freely distributed and modified at the source code level to accommodate individual needs in functionality. VirtualBox and VMware Player are easily two of the most cost-effective options on the market of x86 processor virtualization software. These statements may have some truth to them, but the battle gets far more competitive when comparing Oracle's VirtualBox to something more similar like VMware Player. Ask them to elaborate and they'll likely tell you that VMware is the ultimate solution for server virtualization, while VirtualBox is best suited for virtualizing desktop environments.

If you ask, 'which is better', 'which should I go with', or a similar question to knowledgeable IT professionals, most will say that it's VMware hands down. One of those competitors is IT software giant Oracle, who jumped into the virtual computing game in 2007 with the aptly named VirtualBox. VMware has been the undisputed king of this space for quite some time, but numerous competitors have emerged to challenge its comfy position upon that throne. Thanks to a handy technology called virtualization, running multiple operating systems and applications on a single host machine is now the norm in IT environments of all sizes. Möchten Sie diesen Beitrag in Deutsch zu lesen? Lesen Sie die Deutsch-Version hier.

Vmware vs virtualbox for windows image