Desktop virtualization products comparison

InfoWorld publshed a long comparison, with interesting charts, between Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 (scored 7.4/10), Parallels Workstation 2.2 (scored 7.8/10), VMware Workstation 6.0 beta 3 (scored 8.3/10), and the new InnoTek Virtual Box 1.3 (scored 6.9/10).

Comparison is particularly interesting because of last entry, Virtual Box, which shows a good set of features compared against more mature competitors.

Anyway is worth to remember it isnt completely fair since VMware Workstation 6.0 is still in beta and it’s not known if the product already is feature complete.

InfoWorld provided such conclusion:

As with most mature market segments, the major players in the desktop virtualization space have carved out sustainable niches for themselves. VMware Workstation continues to dominate the developer landscape, with Version 6.0 further solidifying its position at the top of the virtualization heap. Microsoft’s Virtual PC 2007 has been relegated to a “VMware player” type of existence, while Parallels Workstation for Windows 2.2, though a speed demon, struggles to escape the shadow of its favored (and better equipped) sibling, Parallels Desktop for the Macintosh. And despite a poor benchmark showing, VirtualBox still delivers a modular, developer-friendly architecture that effectively complements its open source licensing.

Longer term, these vendors have one of two options: Dig in and try to carve out the biggest piece of a very limited pie (developers and help desk professionals); or evolve their products into something more all-encompassing, as VMware has attempted to do with ESX, VDI, ACE, and other acronyms du jour. With Microsoft already focused on the datacenter and with InnoTek well on its way to delivering an ESX-type solution, that leaves Parallels as the odd man out.

Read the whole comparison at source.