I may as well jump on the bandwagon here... :D
I find VirtualBox quite easy to set up; most things just work out-of-the box,
whatever the OS you install upon it, and its simple GUI allows even things
which do need a bit of configuration to be handled in a fairly straightforward
manner.
Also - although it does not allow native disk access as you described VMWare
does - its uncompressed .VDI files can be mounted (under Linux, at least) and
accessed directly from the desktop without any intervention from VirtualBox
itself or the VM to which it is attached. Or, if one runs Windows instead,
there is [Arsenal Image
Mounter](https://github.com/ArsenalRecon/Arsenal-Image-Mounter) which provides
similar functionality.
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Tuesday, March 17, 2020 5:20 PM, Bret Johnson <bretj...@juno.com> wrote:
> Karen:
>
> Inside a Virtual Machine, ALL hardware is virtualized to some degree or
> other -- you never get direct access to the real hardware (whether it's
> keyboard or mouse or video screen or hard drive or serial port or even the
> clock). Exactly what gets virtualized through to the VM and exactly how it
> gets passed through depends on the VM. Different VM's do some things better
> than others.
>
> I've played around a little bit with different VM's (VMWare, Bochs, DOSBox,
> QEMU, VirtualPC, PCEm, and others). None of them are very easy to set up.
> and they all have their limitations and quirks. At least for my purposes, I
> still find VMWare to be better than the others even though I still consider
> it really pretty bad and don't do anything serious with it. And again, the
> main problem I have with VMWare is that it does not pass the keyboard though
> to the VM like it should and the keyboard is VERY critical in DOS (far more
> critical than the mouse).
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
