This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Virtual appliance article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computing: Software Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).

--SimonBramfitt (talk) 21:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sometime ago JumpBox was removed as a reference to this article. (full disclosure, I work for JumpBox) We are a publisher of a specific type of virtual appliance(s) (including one for [Mediawiki) that are smaller and portable, compared to other examples like rPath. Should we be included in this article? If not, where within Wikipedia might me look into? Thanks

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenbshaffer (talk • contribs) 18:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it woulode be better to delete the link 'Virtual Homepage'

Disadvantages[edit]

I wonder if there should be some notes on disadvantages of using virtual appliances. Are there any that are significant? I assume client performance is one. - Red1 D Oon (talk) 23:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No reference, and purely anecdotal, but a consultant told a colleague (yeah, it does sound like an urban myth!) that his company wouldn't run RDBMSs as virtual appliances. Personally I've run SVN within VMWare and it runs great, but SVN doesn't have high CPU demands - it tends to be IO-bound - compared to a production RDBMS. I'd suggest if you really, really need performance you'd want application running on a physical box; if manageability is more important then a virtual box is a good alternative. Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 10:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

== [hello world] == this is gmright.inc from.git.com with Mit license. under. patch. license

This article is chock full of buzzwords, and the result is that it is completely unintelligible if you don't already know what a virtual appliance is. You can read the whole article, and still have no idea what a virtual appliance is. Gmakulu, the introductory paragraph of software appliance contains more useful information about virtual appliances than this article does.

99.41.56.246 (talk) 23:09, 21 December 2018 (UTC) at https://www.github.com/georgemakulu[reply]

Relationship to WAN optimization[edit]

This is little more than marketing. Yes, WAN optimization vendors offer their products as virtual appliances, but I don't think it warrants a section here.

I'll delete unless someone can offer why it should be kept.--SimonBramfitt (talk) 18:50, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it has no relationship at all. I'm deleting it. Stvrly (talk) 07:41, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Open Virtualization Format?[edit]

Shouldn't this page be merged with Open Virtualization Format? Information seems to be interchangeable, together the content would make for a better article it seems. --Z Doc (talk) 10:46, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Buzzwords alert[edit]

From the very beginning, there are some Type 1 and Type 2 hypervisors mentioned. I don't get myself what these categories mean, and I believe that other readers who are not "in theme" won't get it as well. I think this needs some explanation. MilostchBarko (talk) 08:30, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]