[conspire] (forw) Re: (forw) Re: VirtualBox

[Dan Bikle]

Paul,
Answer to q1: My experience with virtualbox is that it is buggy and
unreliable on windows. For USB features and support you will need to see
how virtualbox behaves on your PC.  I have seen evidence that USB support
exists for virtualbox guests but I dont know how reliable it is.

Answer to q2: I prefer .txt files.
-Dan


On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Paul Zander <paulz at ieee.org> wrote:

> Many months later, I am moving forward on VirtualBox.
>
> The next step is to actually install VirtualBox.
>
> 2 quick questions:
> 1)  Regarding hardware.  I have at least one Windows program that uses a
> special USB thingy.  Can Windows in VirtualBox, readily find the USB
> thingy?   Will that lock up the entire USB? For example the mouse which is
> also on USB?
>
> 2)  I have been making rather detailed step-by-step notes of the process.
> It is several pages; Much too long to send as an email.  Is this something
> that should be posted on linuxmafia?  If so, what format is preferred?
> PFD, ODT, TXT?
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com>
> *To:* conspire at linuxmafia.com
> *Sent:* Friday, April 8, 2016 1:26 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [conspire] (forw) Re: (forw) Re: VirtualBox
>
> Quoting Paul Zander (Paul Zander):
>
> > Regarding disk and partition units:The particular machine has a 1TB
> > drive.  Originally C: 900 GB.  There were some "hidden" partitions,
> > which seem to be standard windoz something.
>
> If I were you, I would spend some effort figuring out what those are and
> what they're for.
>
> > Win8 includes a partition manager, but it has limited functionality.
>
> Yes, you'll ideally want to use a real, open source one, run from a live CD
> (which impliedly includes USB flash) distribution.
>
> > Regarding flash vs. SSD:Both are solid state memories based on NAND
> > cells which have a limited number of write cycles before they
> > degrade.  SSD has a enhancements to increase the life by 10X or more.
> > Now that think about it, only a few years ago people were questioning
> > if solid state memories were reliable enough to replace spinning
> > disks.
>
> Early on with NAND flash devices, there was a lot of worry about limited
> numbers of write/erase cycles and consequent early device death.  As you
> say, current production drives have so extended that number of cycles
> that nobody is really worried any more.  By the time your 2016 SSDs are
> wearing out, you're almost certain to want to replace them with better,
> faster, massively higher capacity, cheaper, tinier 2022 SSDs (or whatever).
>
> People who remain worried are, of course, perfectly welcome to stick to
> (slow, power-sucking, heat-and-noise-generating) spinning-rust drives,
> that aren't exactly immune to device failure, either.
>
> _______________________________________________
> conspire mailing list
> conspire at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> conspire mailing list
> conspire at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/conspire/attachments/20160923/ba7a2959/attachment.html>