Revision as of 21:15, 20 January 2013

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

--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

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]

Very uninformative article

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. Frankly, 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 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship to WAN optimization

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]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{WikiProject Computing|class=|importance=|software=yes|software-importance=}}
+--[[User:SimonBramfitt|SimonBramfitt]] ([[User talk:SimonBramfitt|talk]]) 21:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 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 [[http://www.jumpbox.com/app/mediawiki 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