I've been running Ubuntu on it for a while now, and I have no complaints.

To compare with VMWare, VB doesn't have the Unity feature, but that only works with virtual machines running Windows, so if you're running a free OS, run it on a free virtualizer!

Sweet. I didn't want to shell out for VMWare or Parallels since I just need to run Win 98 & WordPerfect 8 (from 1997) occasionally to open some old files & use my scanner (Xerox Documate 510, with no Mac or SANE drivers available). It works great for both -- USB support with the scanner is flawless so far. The only issue is that display options for Win98 are pretty limited but for something I use only a few times a week it's fine.

this cannot be universal since its a x86 virtualizer.

homepage says: "VirtualBox for OS X Hosts (Beta 2; Intel Macs only)"

i'm running a vista vm and an xp vm, and it is just as fast as fusion/parallels, and best of all it's free.

there is no coherence/unity equivalent, but other than that, i haven't noticed any discernable differences between the commercial software and this wonderful free offering.

I've installed OpenSuse using this. It was headache free.

I spoke too soon. VirtualBox does indeed feature automatic mouse capture, as well as seamless folder sharing. No drag and drop from the finder, but moving files back and fourth is generally not too difficult. This software works fine!

It seems to work well enough. Maybe a bit slower than parallels or VMware, but usable. Also doesn't have all the features of the other two, (e.g., mouse capture and release has to be done manually, no drag and drop from host to guest). But it works, and you can't beat the price.

izahn

anyone tried it yet? how does it compare to vmware and parallel?