Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am planning on installing 32-bit Ubuntu inside a virtual machine on a Windows machine (Dell Latitude E6500). I have plenty of memory, and sufficient hard drive space to manage this, but I'm wondering if there's any particular reason to prefer VirtualBox over Microsoft's Virtual PC for this usage.

Anyone have any solid, objective reasons to prefer one over the other?

share|improve this question
up vote 0 down vote accepted

See the answers to this question:

Short version of highest rated answer at the time: MS VPC was designed to run Windows.

share|improve this answer
perfect, thanks! – cori Aug 24 '10 at 15:36

Apart from the specific Linux support (against MS's specific Linux non-support) Virtual Box also gives you a lot of other features - USB, hardware accelrated video, and a lot more disk snapshot options.

share|improve this answer

I have personally experienced lots of crashing with Microsoft's product. VirtualBox is much more stable, free, cross platform, more features, etc... :)

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .