Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • October 24, 2016, 06:48:00 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Author Topic: no VirtualBox ???  (Read 3363 times)


  • Participant
  • Joined in 2009
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
no VirtualBox ???
« on: January 11, 2009, 05:00:21 PM »
I've been using VirtualBox from Sun and using it with Ubuntu. I had only a couple of guest: WinXP and Win98, but they work just fine. Well, maybe not Win98, which runs slower then WinXP. I can't understand it why u haven't included VirtualBox in your review...

On the same pc but another hardisk, I have WinXP running VirtualPC with only Win98 (which runs faster than in VirtualBox) that I used mainly to run old games and apps which are not supported by new Windows OSes like WinXP.

Overall, I would use VirtualBox exclusively if it runs Win98 as fast as WinXP. It makes you think with an almost the same specs you specify -- 521 Mb RAM, 128 Mb video RAM, HD space, etc.. -- you'd expect Win98 to behave like a Ferrari, but instead you get a Model T.


  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,237
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: no VirtualBox ???
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2009, 05:08:28 PM »
Shame on you Mouse Man!!
If I have a spare lunch this week I'll poke around for a few comparisons or reviews.



  • Developer
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,120
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: no VirtualBox ???
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2009, 11:15:02 AM »
The DonationCoder review was done in 2005 and the first public release of VirtualBox was in 2007, so I guess we will have to blame the lack of time machines :mrgreen:.