VMWare Fusion Beta 3 out

[wingdo]

from the notes:

Improved performance: You now have the option of turning off debugging features in VMware Fusion to enjoy even better performance.

Support for Boot Camp: You no longer have to choose between Windows or Mac—run Windows XP side-by-side with Mac OS X off your existing Boot Camp partition.

Windows Easy Install: Just answer a few simple questions, insert your Windows CD, and VMware Fusion will automatically create a Windows virtual machine that is optimized for your Mac.

Virtual machine packages: Virtual machines are now encapsulated in a single, easy-to-manage package. Move your virtual machines to another hard drive or Mac simply by copying a file.

Enhanced virtual machine management: Managing multiple virtual machines and changing virtual machine settings is even easier with the Virtual Machine Library.

Improved international support: European and Japanese Apple keyboards now work properly in virtual machines.

[stellaclose]

Got it working.

[goudkamp]

That's good news! Can you still use Vista when you go native? Any conflicts with Parallels?

[dkp]

Parallels and Fusion have always run well together here. I frequently run them at the same time and can even cut/paste between them. There's a Fusion forum at VMWare to discuss specific Fusion features and performance.

Except for coherence there's little functional difference when running XP. Advantage goes to Fusion for Linux/Solaris support. The two companies will no doubt converge on critical supported features and performance at some point, then fluff will be added and then it will be a matter of individual preferences that leans one to one vendor or the other.

[chrisj303]

Thanks for the heads-up, i'm going to download it now.

The amount of times i've heard Fusion being praised over on the ubuntu forums the last couple days is staggering!

cheers,
chrisj303

[idanmashaal]

I installed it yesterday (by chance I registered and saw beta 3) and I didn't like it.
It felt heavy.

When I tried to transfer a windows install to vmware via acronis trueimage (with universal restore) all I got was blue screen.
On the ubuntu side, install took forever and hung on 90 percent all night.

I know this is beta, but it's just my 2 cents.

[akac]

If we're using Parallels with Bootcamp, I wonder if we can easily try Fusion under Bootcamp too...

[MBX]

does anyone know if the 3d performance is better than in parallels?

[dkp]

does anyone know if the 3d performance is better than in parallels?

Of course it is. Parallels hasn't any at all. Fusion has limited support for DirectX 8.1 only. No Vista support.

[MBX]

what i mean is will it outperforme parallels when i use a 3d program like maya?
(i wasn't talking so much about gaming stuff)

[dkp]

what i mean is will it outperforme parallels when i use a 3d program like maya?
(i wasn't talking so much about gaming stuff)

A better way to frame the question is how will it perform relative to Windows running native (boot camp). The Fusion EULA does not permit discussing performance except on their forum so that would be a good place to go. If OS X performance is not too important while you use Windows or other VM, having two processors available to the VM would likely be an advantage.

[RandomNinjaAtk]

I got the new Fusion beta working. I really like it. The main thing that vmware fusion provides and I like way more then parallels, its the interface.

The interface seems more modern and fits in with my mac programs. Parallels feels like windows xp on classic mode for the interface.

I also like how in Vmware fusion, you don't have to install anything on the boot camp partition to be able to use it.

I can't wait till vmware is rock solid and good to go. Not that I don't like parallels, I already own a copy. I just think some interface improvements would be nice and of course 3D accelleration.

Who ever has the best 3D acceleration and overall performance will most likely be the winner in the battle of the two virtualization products.

[MBX]

i just went through the hassle to test it and i must say the performance is better. it runs my 3d applications much smoother. not sure if its because of that 3d (direct x) acceleration...

but for now i'll be using vmfusion for work until parallels gets out something better, more powerful (better 3d) than vmfusion.

[websyndicate]

wow can you feel the heat now parallels.

[VTMac]

Who ever has the best 3D acceleration and overall performance will most likely be the winner in the battle of the two virtualization products.


I seriously doubt 3D acceleration will have any significant impact on the ultimate winner. The VAST, VAST, VAST majority (as in more than 90%) of business applications have no need whatsoever of 3D support. And ultimately, it's the mainstream part of the market that will determine the winner. Don't confuse people on message boards willing to try out new beta VM features like 3D with the rest of the real world. The rest of the people out their want something that is brain dead simple to use and is rock solid. That's who will be the winner.

[manfredell]

i just went through the hassle to test it and i must say the performance is better. it runs my 3d applications much smoother. not sure if its because of that 3d (direct x) acceleration...

but for now i'll be using vmfusion for work until parallels gets out something better, more powerful (better 3d) than vmfusion.

I felt the oposite. It is MUCH slower than parallels. Installed XP and Vista on 2 new VM's.
They often stalled for seconds or minutes. Not impressed.

[superchink]

If we're using Parallels with Bootcamp, I wonder if we can easily try Fusion under Bootcamp too...

Anyone have any experience trying this out?

[mike3k]

Unless Parallels improves their Linux support, I'm switching to VMware. The latest Ubuntu beta won't even boot in Parallels but I had no trouble installing it in VMware. They even have VMware tools for Linux, so the VM window doesn't capture the mouse like Parallels does when running Linux.

The only advantage Parallels has is Coherence mode for Windows, but I could live without it if I can run Linux as nicely as I run Windows.

[nimsoft]

Gotta say, loving it!!
Performance is great once you turn debug off, especially if you have more than one processor core (and allow access to them for your VM!)

The multi processor support makes a huge difference as it seems a waste to only have access to one core.

The USB 2.0 has so little latency I can use an external soundcard and connected it directly to the VM so it has full access to the hardware! I tried this on Parallels but the audio was so choppy I couldn't make it out at all!

Earlier I was installing Ubuntu on one machine whilst 3d gaming on another ;)

I really hope Parallels have some surprises on the way :D

[nimsoft]

If we're using Parallels with Bootcamp, I wonder if we can easily try Fusion under Bootcamp too...

I tried it, seamless once VMTools was in! :)

In fact I didn't get that huge lag when booting I get when booting the Boot Camp partition in parallels either, it was straight away...

[slboettcher]

I am able to use a Nortel VPN connection on the Mac side and use it in Windows in Fusion.
That alone is a killer element for me. One connection, both sides using the tunnel without any screwing around.

I've had a couple odd freezes with shared folders, and performance isn't up to Parallels, but this is going to give me an option, and I hope the Parallels guys can step up here.

Haven't tried anything 3D yet, but will just for kicks.

I think networking is very important, and ease-of-use more so. :eek:

[clbell]

I installed it and used it with my Boot Camp partition of XP. I like it so far. It's faster and uses less memory. However, I can't use VirtueDesktop with it so it's a no-go unless they add some kind of way to pass key combinations to OSX so virtue can do its switching.

[dkp]

I installed it and used it with my Boot Camp partition of XP. I like it so far. It's faster and uses less memory. However, I can't use VirtueDesktop with it so it's a no-go unless they add some kind of way to pass key combinations to OSX so virtue can do its switching.

I use and prefer Desktop Manager over VirtueDesktop, and it works fine with Parallels and Fusion. The universal version is here: http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/12682

[dhjdhj]

While I understand all the arguments for why a Windows user might want/need access to Linux, why is this the case for Mac users? After all, you've got a rock solid BSD Unix underneath already (complete with X11 server) and as far as I know, pretty much anything available for Linux boxes can be made to work under BSD?

D
Unless Parallels improves their Linux support, I'm switching to VMware. The latest Ubuntu beta won't even boot in Parallels but I had no trouble installing it in VMware. They even have VMware tools for Linux, so the VM window doesn't capture the mouse like Parallels does when running Linux.

The only advantage Parallels has is Coherence mode for Windows, but I could live without it if I can run Linux as nicely as I run Windows.

[VTMac]

In my case, it's because the software product I develop runs on linux. So while I do most of my development on OSX, ultimately it is deployed on Linux and this is where I must test/validate. Also some really important applications -- like Oracle -- don't have (or have very limited) versions that run on OSX. While I would advocate running Oracle in production on any VM, it's great for doing demo's, testing, development and such.

[dkp]

While I understand all the arguments for why a Windows user might want/need access to Linux, why is this the case for Mac users? After all, you've got a rock solid BSD Unix underneath already (complete with X11 server) and as far as I know, pretty much anything available for Linux boxes can be made to work under BSD?

D

The company I work for is ripping out Sun and Windows servers and replacing them (where possible) with IBM blade servers running Linux. I need to support Linux - that simple. And I hate Linux. I also need to support Apple XServers, and for a while at least, Solaris.

[austin]

I seriously doubt 3D acceleration will have any significant impact on the ultimate winner. The VAST, VAST, VAST majority (as in more than 90%) of business applications have no need whatsoever of 3D support. And ultimately, it's the mainstream part of the market that will determine the winner. Don't confuse people on message boards willing to try out new beta VM features like 3D with the rest of the real world. The rest of the people out their want something that is brain dead simple to use and is rock solid. That's who will be the winner.Many of the programs people are needing Parallels or VMWare for are dependent on user input (which can be slow or fast depending on the user), or do not care about 3D acceleration.

The programs that need true 3D acceleration - one would be better off with Boot Camp, or even a $$00 PC.

[nicka]

Okay, since Fusion Beta 3 now allows using boot camp partition like parallels, can anyone with Vista installed on Boot Camp confirm if Fusion works with it, or is that feature limited to XP like parallels?

Nick

[pducharme]

Hi,

I tried my Vista Bootcamp partition (with latest Bootcamp 1.2) in Fusion and It work.

Didnt installed VM tools, but can confirm it is booting to the desktop.

[DJ-GROBE]

I test, and my aplication MonoToucLive, (ww.monotouchlive.com) just not work.
Under parallels work perfect.

I see vmware make lower usage of cpu comapred with paralleles,.........anyway, i detect slow, work of all winfdows, Vmware need a lot of work , and i think if paralleles focuse more, in the functionalitly and no in things like COHERENCE, vmware never can reach the quality of paralleles.

[websyndicate]

VMware has just begun in the game as for parallels has been around for a while yea they could do better if they could not worry about COHERENCE so much it would be great. More performacnce less eye candy

[palter]

Unless Parallels improves their Linux support, I'm switching to VMware. The latest Ubuntu beta won't even boot in Parallels but I had no trouble installing it in VMware. They even have VMware tools for Linux, so the VM window doesn't capture the mouse like Parallels does when running Linux.

The only advantage Parallels has is Coherence mode for Windows, but I could live without it if I can run Linux as nicely as I run Windows.
Which kernel version is Ubuntu?

I'm having no luck getting VMWare Tools for Linux working on Fedora Core with a 2.6.20 kernel.

[Piggy]

There's a Fusion forum at VMWare to discuss specific Fusion features and performance.

Would you mind providing the link? I can't seem to find it on their community forum page. Also any info about being able to run or convert Parallels VMs to use in Fusion as I'd like to try it out. Thanks.

[drval]

VMware has just begun in the game as for parallels has been around for a while yea they could do better if they could not worry about COHERENCE so much it would be great. More performacnce less eye candy

For some of us Coherence is not "eye candy" but it is essential functionality.

How would you feel if some of us called your favorite functions/abilities something like "function candy"?

[solgae]

The thing that VMware wins over Parallels for me is that DAEMON Tools works great under VMware. Parallels throws an SCSI error. Also, host power status can be brought over to guest OS, so if you're running on battery power, the guest OS will be on battery power profile as well, saving you some precious battery time. And it might just be me, but VMware seems to have better USB 2.0 support. Experimental 3D support is also a plus - not the best, but it's there if you need it.

Parallels wins on Coherence support, though I'm willing to live without it. Also, I don't know about you, but Parallels just feels a tiny bit more snappier. This is when I compare VMware w/o the debug mode and Parallels.

[n9yty]

This is because Fusion is able to provide this great performance (for me it is quite acceptable!) WITHOUT having to stall at startup while creating a HUGE .mem file on your hard drive. On my machine, with 2GB of RAM, Paralells insists on creating a 1.5GB .mem file when I start it up. A horrible waste of time and disk space just to get the VM running, and Fusion doesn't require it. Let the people rejoice! :)

[n9yty]

It's a pain, but if you go up to the menu bar so it drops down, then click on it, you can then switch away using VirtueDesktops. Just FYI.

[tim-e]

VMware has just begun in the game as for parallels has been around for a while yea they could do better if they could not worry about COHERENCE so much it would be great. More performacnce less eye candyI use Coherence functionality almost daily. There's nothing more annoying than having all of Windows XP up on my desktop just to use SANtricity.

[websyndicate]

For some of us Coherence is not "eye candy" but it is essential functionality.

How would you feel if some of us called your favorite functions/abilities something like "function candy"?
my favorite function is full screen :D

[websyndicate]

I have switched to vmware for now I still have my back up from my parallels images as always but as for the final switch we will see at the end who know. I havent decided yet....as for everybody who wants more linux functionality what is it that you want?

[wesley]

This is because Fusion is able to provide this great performance (for me it is quite acceptable!) WITHOUT having to stall at startup while creating a HUGE .mem file on your hard drive. On my machine, with 2GB of RAM, Paralells insists on creating a 1.5GB .mem file when I start it up. A horrible waste of time and disk space just to get the VM running, and Fusion doesn't require it. Let the people rejoice! :)
I personally want to know what the heck is going on with the huge .mem file as well. I set my VM to grab 512MB of memory, yet Parallels created a 1.46GB .mem file in the VM's folder. Google leads me to this thread:

http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?t=7180

...but of course there is no conclusive answer.

Meanwhile, I'm with the 'Coherence is an essential feature' camp. I cannot justify having to see a whole separate desktop while running a couple of Windows app when it is clearly possible to do away with it (the Windows desktop, that is). It's great to have Internet Explorer running in VM and Firefox on the OS X running right next to each other, for example.

[websyndicate]

I use Coherence functionality almost daily. There's nothing more annoying than having all of Windows XP up on my desktop just to use SANtricity.
My issue with coherence is basically do you want to sacrifice performance to get a little happiness?

[solgae]

I don't see what performance sacrifice - I have never seen any. But then, I have 2GB of RAM.

Maybe you might want to consider how much memory you allocate? I used 384MB and it ran XP just fine, while leaving OS X enough memory to deal with other things. And that's when I had a gig of RAM.

[lithe951]

Coherence is a definite performance hit and as a result, I don't use it every day. I also have 2Gb and have tried allocations of 256, 512, 768 and 1024 to the VM. In windowed mode 256 and 512 provide decent performance but fall somewhat in number-crunching spreadsheets. 1024 seems to lag as well, while 768 looks like the best performance for working with large spreadsheets. In coherence mode, ALL of them suck, dragging and sometimes locking up Excel. I only use coherence with basic apps - IE, Outlook and some tools. If I need to use Excel I toggle back to windowed mode. Coherence is very cool and I like it, but it's a big performance hit.

[drval]

Coherence is a definite performance hit and as a result, I don't use it every day. I also have 2Gb and have tried allocations of 256, 512, 768 and 1024 to the VM. In windowed mode 256 and 512 provide decent performance but fall somewhat in number-crunching spreadsheets. 1024 seems to lag as well, while 768 looks like the best performance for working with large spreadsheets. In coherence mode, ALL of them suck, dragging and sometimes locking up Excel. I only use coherence with basic apps - IE, Outlook and some tools. If I need to use Excel I toggle back to windowed mode. Coherence is very cool and I like it, but it's a big performance hit.

I have simply NOT see this kind of hit and I use Excel both in the Mac and Windows versions, as well as LabVIEW, Visual Studio, and I'm running Norton SystemWorks as well.

[austinso]

I was just wondering if anyone heard back about the "excessive" windowing (?) in Parallels...I have no problem with performance per se, but that is mainly because I rarely run apps in OSX and XP at the same time (I don't like having the fan cum hair-blower on all the freaking time)

Simply turning Parallels on hogs about 2.1 gigs of virtual memory, with 153 megs hard-wired. This is in contrast to what I've been seeing with VM fusion, which leaves nowhere near the memory "footprint" (25 megs hard-wired, 437 megs virtual...hmm 5-fold greater?).

Are they simply throwing memory at Parallels to make it more responsive?

BTW...I have 756 megs allocated to Parallels of my 2 gigs on my Blackbook.

Austin

[Stevamundo]

For some of us Coherence is not "eye candy" but it is essential functionality.

How would you feel if some of us called your favorite functions/abilities something like "function candy"?

Always remember, “one person's garbage is another person's treasure.” :D

[akac]

Well I tried VM Fusion. Ran quite nicely. I loved how fast it started up and how it didn't hit my OS X system. Note, I am using a BootCamp based VM.

That said, a few issues:

1) I couldn't get folder sharing or D&D between environments to work at all.
2) When I tried navigating to \\.home\Shared\\akac - the entire system froze my UI. I was getting windows popping up and I could move my mouse, but it was like I was in a glass box. Nothing I did would actually work. I could not actually select OK or the dock or switch apps or ANYTHING. I was forced to hard quit my machine and on startup, all my networking was dead and frozen including the airport menu and the network system prefs. I had to startup in safe-mode, uninstall vmware fusion, and reboot. Then all worked fine.

While it was faster to startup, it felt slower than Parallels. Also I really dislike the toolbar at the top.

[solgae]

Well I tried VM Fusion. Ran quite nicely. I loved how fast it started up and how it didn't hit my OS X system. Note, I am using a BootCamp based VM.

That said, a few issues:

1) I couldn't get folder sharing or D&D between environments to work at all.
2) When I tried navigating to \\.home\Shared\\akac - the entire system froze my UI. I was getting windows popping up and I could move my mouse, but it was like I was in a glass box. Nothing I did would actually work. I could not actually select OK or the dock or switch apps or ANYTHING. I was forced to hard quit my machine and on startup, all my networking was dead and frozen including the airport menu and the network system prefs. I had to startup in safe-mode, uninstall vmware fusion, and reboot. Then all worked fine.

While it was faster to startup, it felt slower than Parallels. Also I really dislike the toolbar at the top.

The toolbar can be hidden by View -> Hide Toolbar.

I found a few bugs as of now, but I think it's a better solution than Parallels as long as you are willing to give up Coherence support and you need rudimentary 3D support. VMware doesn't seem to be willing to implement the function similar to Coherence.

I also like the fact that VMware DOES allows you to standby the boot camp VM. Quite handy.

[akac]

Yes, but it does not stick. Everytime I started up, the toolbar was back.

[sidssp]

Yes, but it does not stick. Everytime I started up, the toolbar was back.
This is Parallels support forum not VMWare support forum. I think we should keep VMWare support discussions to minimum.

[dailo]

Can anyone comment on the performance of Vista in VMware compared to Parallels? I'm trying to figure out is the performance slowing down because of processor saturation or is it because parallels doesn't have the graphics support all there compared to VMware. Thanks!

[ehurtley]

Unfortunately, because of VMWare's license terms, they prohibit the posting of benchmarks of Fusion anywhere other than their own forums. You can search their forums, though.

[akac]

This is Parallels support forum not VMWare support forum. I think we should keep VMWare support discussions to minimum.
Who asked for support? I didn't. Read my post. I was telling people that I tried Fusion, and stuck with Parallels and why. Somebody mentioned something in regards to what I wrote so I explained myself further.

I mean sheesh - who made you forum admin?

[wingdo]

This is Parallels support forum not VMWare support forum. I think we should keep VMWare support discussions to minimum.

Correct, and what better way to talk about Parallels than to compare them to their direct competitor? This is a discussion forum people should be free to discuss Parallels and what people want to see in it, including what others have already implemented and or things Parallels does better.

People are also on the VmWare forums requesting features like Coherence. You cannot expect these forums to exist in a vacuum and pretend there are not alternatives. Nor should you.

[sidssp]

Who asked for support? I didn't. Read my post. I was telling people that I tried Fusion, and stuck with Parallels and why. Somebody mentioned something in regards to what I wrote so I explained myself further.

I mean sheesh - who made you forum admin?
No admin here, just some friendly suggestions. If I had offended you in any way, please accept my apology.