Against VMware Workstation, my company evaluated options like Microsoft Hyper-V and VirtualBox. My company chose VMware Workstation because of its good USB connections and other peripheral device connections.

Back when we choose this solution 20 years ago there were not many virtualization tools available. There were Parallels and a few others.

We evaluated Microsoft Hyper-V. It is an expensive product. So, we decided to go with VMware Workstation.

The reason that I chose and continue to like VMware is that it's a commercial product and it's funded and it develops and they're improving it. I love open-source, but I understand that some levels of development are more easily attained when there's a monetary incentive behind it.

If we cannot afford the solution, we can use VMware Player or VirtualBox.

No

Yes, virtual box and Hyper-v (comes with Windows 8 and 10 professional for free so you really don't need to buy Hyper-V) VMware is far more powerful than either of the free ones. No Network editor, the ability to copy and paste on the fly etc. is limited on the freebies. See my comments below about network editor.

I use Hyper-V for the same purposes but VMware Workstation performs well and scales down to our developers needs easily.