My ctrlX Core is booting up much faster than the ctrlX Core Virtual with same apps (also same release). It's like 20 s against 300 s (measured). What is considered as a normal Boot Duration for the virtual Core?
According to that How-To I did:
Any other hints?
Solved! Go to Solution.
Is your ctrlX COREvirtual installed on your host OS or in a virtual machine? Because the hardware acceleration does not work in virtualizations.
See official support page of Intel.
I updated the link.
Was it once running ok and then slowed down after e.g. a windows update?
Please execute the haxm check file in the installation of your ctrlX WORKS (C:\Program Files\Rexroth\ctrlX WORKS\haxm-windows_v7_6_1\haxm_check.exe). The support should be both yes.
If VT is no, you could also try to reinstall the haxm with the setup.exe in the same location.
If you have further problems please the official microsoft support forum. This topic is referring to the Andriod emulator that uses the same mechanisms then our ctrlX COREvirtual.
Ah thanks, it's HAXM based. That's a pitty, HAXM isn't supporting Device Guard/HVCI/Credential Guard. So afaik it isn't possible to use Docker (and some others) at the same time. And it is a big problem if DG is managed by corporate group policy. There is almost no way to convince corporate IT to change GPOs 🙂 Even MS got that and changed the Emulator to use Hyper-V instead of HAXM..
If booting up a Core Virtual is a pain, haxm_check tells you VT is No, but you're sure it should be YES:
There is a MS Tool to dis-/enable the features (use PS with admin rights and ./DG_Readiness_Tool_v3.6.ps1 -Disable)