Software Alternatives, Accelerators & Startups

BusyBox VS ZOC Terminal

Compare BusyBox VS ZOC Terminal and see what are their differences

BusyBox logo BusyBox

BusyBox is a single binary that provides several stripped-down Unix tools in a single executable.

ZOC Terminal logo ZOC Terminal

ZOC is a professional SSH/telnet client and terminal emulator. With its impressive list of emulations and features, it is a snap to access hosts and mainframes via secure shell, telnet, serial cable, modem/isdn and other methods of communication.
  • BusyBox Landing page
    Landing page //
    2019-04-14
  • ZOC Terminal Landing page
    Landing page //
    2023-01-08

BusyBox features and specs

  • Lightweight
    BusyBox is designed to be a minimalistic utility that combines tiny versions of many common UNIX utilities into a single small executable, making it ideal for systems with limited resources.
  • All-in-One
    It provides a comprehensive suite of tools and utilities in one package, eliminating the need to install and manage multiple separate utilities.
  • Customizable
    BusyBox can be customized to include only the needed utilities, which allows for a tailored solution that fits the specific requirements of a project or system.
  • Open Source
    It is open source, meaning it is freely available for anyone to use, modify, and distribute, which encourages collaboration and community-driven improvements.
  • Widely Used in Embedded Systems
    BusyBox is popular in embedded systems and other environments where storage and processing power are limited, making it a proven choice for resource-constrained applications.

Possible disadvantages of BusyBox

  • Limited Functionality
    Being a smaller version of each utility, BusyBox may lack some of the advanced features found in full versions of UNIX utilities, which can be a limitation for complex tasks.
  • Compatibility Issues
    Certain scripts or applications that expect specific behaviors from standard Linux utilities might not work correctly with BusyBox due to subtle differences in functionality.
  • Less Frequent Updates
    Compared to mainstream distributions and their utilities, BusyBox might not be updated as frequently, which can be a concern for security or feature updates.
  • Steeper Learning Curve for Customization
    Customizing BusyBox to include or exclude specific utilities can require a more in-depth understanding of both the system’s needs and the configuration options available.

ZOC Terminal features and specs

  • Versatile Connectivity
    ZOC Terminal supports a wide range of protocols such as SSH, Telnet, and serial communication, making it suitable for connecting to diverse systems and devices.
  • Tabbed Sessions
    It allows users to open multiple terminal sessions in a tabbed interface, providing a convenient way to manage different connections without cluttering the desktop.
  • Session Management
    ZOC Terminal offers robust session management features, including the ability to save sessions, organize them into folders, and quickly access frequently used connections.
  • Scripting Capabilities
    It supports scripting in languages like REXX, which can be used to automate tasks and streamline workflows, enhancing productivity for advanced users.
  • Customizability
    The terminal provides extensive customization options, including keyboard mappings, color schemes, and font styles, allowing users to tailor the interface to their preferences.

Possible disadvantages of ZOC Terminal

  • Cost
    ZOC Terminal is a commercial product, which means it requires a purchase or license for continued use, making it less appealing for those seeking a free solution.
  • Complexity for Beginners
    The rich feature set and extensive customization options can be overwhelming for beginners, making it less user-friendly compared to simpler terminal emulators.
  • Limited Platform Support
    ZOC Terminal is primarily designed for Windows and macOS, which limits its availability for users on other operating systems like Linux.
  • Resource Intensive
    Due to its advanced features, ZOC Terminal may consume more system resources compared to more lightweight terminal emulators, potentially affecting performance on less powerful machines.

BusyBox videos

What is BusyBox | Busybox demo

More videos:

  • Review - What Is Busybox and Why do we need it for Android?

ZOC Terminal videos

How to Synchronise or Open ZOC Terminal in GNS3 instead of inbuilt GNS3 putty

Category Popularity

0-100% (relative to BusyBox and ZOC Terminal)
Terminal Tools
62 62%
38% 38
SSH
36 36%
64% 64
Server Management
38 38%
62% 62
OS & Utilities
0 0%
100% 100

User comments

Share your experience with using BusyBox and ZOC Terminal. For example, how are they different and which one is better?
Log in or Post with

Reviews

These are some of the external sources and on-site user reviews we've used to compare BusyBox and ZOC Terminal

BusyBox Reviews

Top 10 Best Apps To Use Linux Terminal on Your Android Device
BusyBox is an excellent option for Android users who want to have control in the internal Linux command-line shell. This terminal emulator for Android requires a rooted device to function properly. It is one of the most popular among its competitors. There is a pro version, but the vanilla edition is more than enough for casual users. It will provide you with numerous Unix...
Best Terminal Emulator for Android in 2021
BusyBox is a famous terminal emulator for quick and reliable performance. It needs the device to be rooted for executing the app. The emulator can work well with Linux kernel with GNU Core applications. It offers plenty of standard Unix tools with backup features to retrieve all data. The app provides the user to choose the desired applets for quick installation. It also...

ZOC Terminal Reviews

MobaXterm for Mac: Best Alternatives to MobaXterm for Mac
ZOC is a popular terminal emulator software developed for Mac OS and Windows computer. It is a reliable and elegant tool that connects you to hosts and mainframes via SSH, Telnet and Serial Cable. The impressive list of emulations and powerful features make ZOC Terminal the best alternative to MobaXterm for Mac with modern user interface.
Top 10 Best MobaXterm Alternatives for Windows, macOS & Linux In 2021
ZOC Terminal has been promoted as a popular ssh customer and terminal emulator that support Windows and macOS. It has a big list of emulations and features, that makes it among the very best tools for tasks such as connecting to hosts and mainframes utilizing a safe and secure shell, telnet, and other offered communication methods. It has a present user interface in which...

Social recommendations and mentions

Based on our record, BusyBox seems to be more popular. It has been mentiond 17 times since March 2021. We are tracking product recommendations and mentions on various public social media platforms and blogs. They can help you identify which product is more popular and what people think of it.

BusyBox mentions (17)

  • Revisit base container image for AWS services
    The busybox container is, as the name suggests, a base image that contains the minimum environment for BusyBox to work. It is also one of the official Docker images. The actual Dockerfile for creating this image is as follows:. - Source: dev.to / 4 months ago
  • Making memcpy(NULL, NULL, 0) well-defined
    Https://busybox.net/~landley/c99-draft.html#7.20.6.1 "The abs, labs, and llabs functions compute the absolute value of an integer j. If the result cannot be represented, the behavior is undefined. (242)" 242 The absolute value of the most negative number cannot be represented in two's complement. - Source: Hacker News / 5 months ago
  • Docker, Linux, Security. Kinda.
    On to our second point, which is the cli utilities' implementation. Debian and Ubuntu use gnu's Coreutils while Alpine uses Busybox(remember, we are talking about the most used application container bases. You can install a desktop version of Alpine with GNU coreutils). Here we have the same situation as before, The GNU coreutils are bigger, do more and have a larger attack surface. Busybox is smaller, does not... - Source: dev.to / about 1 year ago
  • The Awk Programming Language, Second Edition
    AWK runs everywhere. Perl and Python do not. Busybox has their own independent AWK implementation. https://busybox.net/ https://frippery.org/busybox/ Also see the first edition of the AWK manual online here: https://archive.org/details/pdfy-MgN0H1joIoDVoIC7. - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago
  • This would have made my life so much easier in the beginning....
    A majority of routers are already based on the Linux kernel. Many are just BusyBox. The most common Linux firewalls are iptables and nftables. With the latter being the most popular one due to being around longer. They are really fine grained and powerful. Source: about 2 years ago
View more

ZOC Terminal mentions (0)

We have not tracked any mentions of ZOC Terminal yet. Tracking of ZOC Terminal recommendations started around Mar 2021.

What are some alternatives?

When comparing BusyBox and ZOC Terminal, you can also consider the following products

Termux - Terminal emulator and Linux environment for Android

WinSSHTerm - A tabbed SSH solution for Windows, combining PuTTY/KiTTY, WinSCP and VcXsrv

GNU Core Utilities - The GNU Core Utilities or coreutils is a package of GNU software containing many of the basic...

wezterm - GPU-accelerated cross-platform terminal emulator and multiplexer made with Rust.

MSYS2 - A Cygwin-derived software distro for Windows using Arch Linux's Pacman

Console2 - Console2 is a modern Windows terminal that features different profiles and color schemes, running as a system service and with support for VIP profiles.