<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: VirtualBox</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dehamerspace.com/2008/09/14/virtualbox/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dehamerspace.com/2008/09/14/virtualbox/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:18:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pax</title>
		<link>http://dehamerspace.com/2008/09/14/virtualbox/comment-page-1/#comment-680</link>
		<dc:creator>Pax</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 10:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dehamerspace.com/?p=45#comment-680</guid>
		<description>One of the key differences for me between VirtualPC (2007) and VirtualBox is speed. I find that on XP, my VirtualBoxes are much faster than my VirtualPC boxes. VirtualBox also uses less memory and doesn&#039;t hog resources like VirtualPC does.

I started with VirtualPC 2007 but when I found I had trouble installing a number of Linux systems, particulary anything Ubuntu for some reason, I started looking for an alternate solution. Qemu wasn&#039;t the answer (had the most trouble with this one) but VirtualBox was. VirtualBox has been so great, I haven&#039;t even bothered to look into VMware.

Now I run a number of lightweight Linux distros, mostly when I surf - for the added security. Even a number of middleweight distros can be run all day long without a huge performance hit on a modern system (1gb memory).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the key differences for me between VirtualPC (2007) and VirtualBox is speed. I find that on XP, my VirtualBoxes are much faster than my VirtualPC boxes. VirtualBox also uses less memory and doesn&#8217;t hog resources like VirtualPC does.</p>
<p>I started with VirtualPC 2007 but when I found I had trouble installing a number of Linux systems, particulary anything Ubuntu for some reason, I started looking for an alternate solution. Qemu wasn&#8217;t the answer (had the most trouble with this one) but VirtualBox was. VirtualBox has been so great, I haven&#8217;t even bothered to look into VMware.</p>
<p>Now I run a number of lightweight Linux distros, mostly when I surf &#8211; for the added security. Even a number of middleweight distros can be run all day long without a huge performance hit on a modern system (1gb memory).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Audi Nugraha</title>
		<link>http://dehamerspace.com/2008/09/14/virtualbox/comment-page-1/#comment-163</link>
		<dc:creator>Audi Nugraha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:23:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dehamerspace.com/?p=45#comment-163</guid>
		<description>QUOTE:
Immutable VDIs are read-only and can be attached to multiple virtual machines simultaneously. At run time, any requests to write data to the immutable disk are directed to a special &quot;differencing disk&quot; created on the fly by VirtualBox.  Much like VirtualPC, VirtualBox completely discards any data written to the differencing disk when the VM is shut down.

Do you know something about saving snapshot from immutable disk?

Thanks in advance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>QUOTE:<br />
Immutable VDIs are read-only and can be attached to multiple virtual machines simultaneously. At run time, any requests to write data to the immutable disk are directed to a special &#8220;differencing disk&#8221; created on the fly by VirtualBox.  Much like VirtualPC, VirtualBox completely discards any data written to the differencing disk when the VM is shut down.</p>
<p>Do you know something about saving snapshot from immutable disk?</p>
<p>Thanks in advance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
