Development Programming in Virtual Machine vs Host Machine

[luinox86]

Hi guys,


I have been around this problem for some time now and want to know you opinions. I am running on HP notebook: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.26GHz, 64bit Windows 7 Professional, 4GB Ram, ATI Graphics.


I want to ask your opinions about doing developments, is it better to be in the host or in a virtual machine? Based on my needs, I usually have to install Visual Studio 6 (cannot avoid!), Visual Studio 2010, NetBeans (php), and sometimes a few more based on temporary requirements.



I don't like the fact that after installing all these, in addition to the normal software I use (BitDefender Internet Security, KMPlayer, FoxitPDF, GTalk and other required software) my OS runs slow, even only after 1-2 months. So to avoid the heavy load on my OS, I decided to move at least all the development platforms into a virtual machine, installed with an old copy of XP. I use VirtualBox for that, proved (on my machine) to be the fastest between the free ones.


But now the problem is the VBox guest is becoming very slow, and even causing my host machine to have CPU usage up to 70% at sometimes, and both the guest and the host freeze!



What is your experiences about that? Is this crashing some problem with the VM? Do you even prefer to move development platforms to a VM or is still better that I install all these on my machine and avoid any virtual machine at all?
I appreciate your opinions.

Regards.

 

[logicearth]

I use Boot From VHD for my development stuff. Uses the host machine without the overhead of a virtual machine. But I think it is only available with Ultimate.

 

[luinox86]

http://www.sevenforums.com/member.php?u=20061Logicearth,

Thanks for the reply. But to me, that would be somehow similar to a dual boot system if I'm not mistaken, is it? Because to boot from the Virtual VHD I have to restart my machine and boot up from the VHD, and to go back to my OS I have to reboot again (please correct me if I'm wrong). One of the reasons I switched to Virtual Machines is that there would be no need to 'leave' my actual OS, I can load the VM, do my works and close it, fast and clean! and that's what I prefer actually.


Regards.

 

[kegobeer]

I think you're running into a horsepower problem. A newer machine would probably handle the VM better than your older Core 2 Duo laptop. I'd give Logicearth's method a try, even if it's a bit of a pain in the tuckus.

 

[luinox86]

http://www.sevenforums.com/member.php?u=20840Kegobeer,
You're right. I will give Logicearth's method a try.
So you agree that the concept of doing the programming (and other specific works) in the VM is better than doing all in the host machine, is it?

 

[kegobeer]

I don't think it's better one way or the other. A VM can simulate the host machine, so if that works best for you, then that's what I would recommend. Quite a bit of development is done on VMs, to protect the host machine against runaway processes, crashes, etc.

 

[luinox86]

The reason I was going to switch to VMs was to avoid the operating system being slow with a high load of software.
I think I will give the VHD a try and if its not working well for me I will just stick to work on the main machine.

Thank you guys.