Who will convert to VMware Fusion when it is released?
- Thread starter limec
- Start date
- Status
Couldn't you have made this as a poll thread? 
Anyways, the current version finally nailed most of the outstanding points I needed, so I'll be sitting on the Parallels camp even if Fusion goes official release before Parallels gets 3D support (the last point I'm waiting for).
ADDENDUM: Looks like you posted this thread based on the 'lackluster customer support' thread thing. To make this as an interesting poll, the options should include the reasons for jumping boat. If Parallels didn't promise 3D support, I would have considered jumping ship for the feature set aspect.
Anyways, the current version finally nailed most of the outstanding points I needed, so I'll be sitting on the Parallels camp even if Fusion goes official release before Parallels gets 3D support (the last point I'm waiting for).
ADDENDUM: Looks like you posted this thread based on the 'lackluster customer support' thread thing. To make this as an interesting poll, the options should include the reasons for jumping boat. If Parallels didn't promise 3D support, I would have considered jumping ship for the feature set aspect.
Last edited:
Hugh Watkins
Forum Maven
if it ain't broken don't fix it
use the time for your work
Hugh W
use the time for your work
Hugh W
I'm moving on. My guess is that in a years time this forum will be as ghostly as SVISTAs.
http://www.serenityvirtual.com/forums/
Yes, same owners, same technology, same dump porduct on unsuspecting market and never be heard from again strategy.
I'm just amazed that the Mac mags are taking these racketeers seriously.
http://www.serenityvirtual.com/forums/
Yes, same owners, same technology, same dump porduct on unsuspecting market and never be heard from again strategy.
I'm just amazed that the Mac mags are taking these racketeers seriously.
Wait and see
...how the features compare when (a) VMWare is on sale and (b) Parallels wants paying for the next update.
Disclaimer: I haven't tried Fusion - but I've used VMWare Workstation on PC and its an excellent product.
Things to consider:
1. Office/productivity/legacy apps
Performance of Parallels is more than good enough for this, while "Coherence" and Parallels' other efforts to integrate Windows with the Mac desktop are a killer feature - saving screen real-estate and letting me use two screens. Fusion would have to beat those.
I don't see the multi-CPU support of VMWare being a killer here - these are not CPU-intensive apps and Parallels itself is taking some advantage of multi cores.
2. Games, 3D and other demanding apps
If I want to run these then it takes 2 minutes to re-boot into native Windows and have a machine firing on all cylinders. Virtualisation will never deliver the same performance as bare metal - and the reports of 3D running under Fusion seem to be restricted to fairly old games.
3. Linux and other non-Microsoft operating systems
Parallels are clearly concentrating on the big Windows market and their Linux support is not stellar, whereas it sounds like Fusion has inherited the Linux tools from VMWare's PC product line. The lack of Linux tools make Parallels pretty hopeless for running a Linux desktop, and even for a server install you have to faff around setting up file sharing and time syncing. Having said that, there are work-arounds for most of that - including using the OSX X11 server to run the desktop to get mouse integration. Plus, while I've made extensive use of virtual linux "development" servers for web apps etc. under Windows, I'm finding them less essential under the Unix-based OSX. However, I could almost see myself using Parallels to run Windows and Fusion to run Linux.
4. Support
This is a "wait and see" issue - VMWare are used to supporting sysadmins and developers (the dominant markets for virtualisation on PC) and they've been much more conservative about how widely they distributed the beta. Lets see how they cope when hoards of non-techie Mac users try installing Windows and hooking it up to their mobile phone or running obscure bits of software. There have been a lot of whinges here about Parallels support - but I'm really glad that its not my job.
5. Price
Everybody is assuming that Fusion will be priced competitively with Parallels (i.e. cheap and cheerful). On PC, the basic VMWare Server and VMWare Player are free, and they make their money by charging serious dosh for their developer and enterprise products. I don't see that working in the Mac market (but who knows).
The real killer would be if VMWare they did a deal with Microsoft and produced a Virtual PC like bundle including an OEM Windows license. Given that they've recently been slagging each other off in public, that seems unlikely.
6. Leopard
And then, the rumours of some sort of better-than-bootcamp Windows integration in Leopard will be confirmed one way or another Real Soon Now. Personally, I doubt it (beyond the pretty well established release version of Bootcamp) - Apple can't be seen to embrace Windows too warmly.
...how the features compare when (a) VMWare is on sale and (b) Parallels wants paying for the next update.
Disclaimer: I haven't tried Fusion - but I've used VMWare Workstation on PC and its an excellent product.
Things to consider:
1. Office/productivity/legacy apps
Performance of Parallels is more than good enough for this, while "Coherence" and Parallels' other efforts to integrate Windows with the Mac desktop are a killer feature - saving screen real-estate and letting me use two screens. Fusion would have to beat those.
I don't see the multi-CPU support of VMWare being a killer here - these are not CPU-intensive apps and Parallels itself is taking some advantage of multi cores.
2. Games, 3D and other demanding apps
If I want to run these then it takes 2 minutes to re-boot into native Windows and have a machine firing on all cylinders. Virtualisation will never deliver the same performance as bare metal - and the reports of 3D running under Fusion seem to be restricted to fairly old games.
3. Linux and other non-Microsoft operating systems
Parallels are clearly concentrating on the big Windows market and their Linux support is not stellar, whereas it sounds like Fusion has inherited the Linux tools from VMWare's PC product line. The lack of Linux tools make Parallels pretty hopeless for running a Linux desktop, and even for a server install you have to faff around setting up file sharing and time syncing. Having said that, there are work-arounds for most of that - including using the OSX X11 server to run the desktop to get mouse integration. Plus, while I've made extensive use of virtual linux "development" servers for web apps etc. under Windows, I'm finding them less essential under the Unix-based OSX. However, I could almost see myself using Parallels to run Windows and Fusion to run Linux.
4. Support
This is a "wait and see" issue - VMWare are used to supporting sysadmins and developers (the dominant markets for virtualisation on PC) and they've been much more conservative about how widely they distributed the beta. Lets see how they cope when hoards of non-techie Mac users try installing Windows and hooking it up to their mobile phone or running obscure bits of software. There have been a lot of whinges here about Parallels support - but I'm really glad that its not my job.
5. Price
Everybody is assuming that Fusion will be priced competitively with Parallels (i.e. cheap and cheerful). On PC, the basic VMWare Server and VMWare Player are free, and they make their money by charging serious dosh for their developer and enterprise products. I don't see that working in the Mac market (but who knows).
The real killer would be if VMWare they did a deal with Microsoft and produced a Virtual PC like bundle including an OEM Windows license. Given that they've recently been slagging each other off in public, that seems unlikely.
6. Leopard
And then, the rumours of some sort of better-than-bootcamp Windows integration in Leopard will be confirmed one way or another Real Soon Now. Personally, I doubt it (beyond the pretty well established release version of Bootcamp) - Apple can't be seen to embrace Windows too warmly.
dlundh said:
It's difficult for me to see any particular reason to move to VMWare. I work in Windows -- not Linux, etc -- and Parallels does the job for me. I'm not interested in Enterprise or IT-department level issues/support.
Of course, I'm looking for 3D support more USB support and a few other features, esp if I would ever use it as a solution for my deployed software but...
I think the real issues concern how much of an "end user" versus Enterprise customer you are, esp as that links into whether Windows or some other OS is you preferred Guest.
P
Parallels User
>>> Message has been deleted by the user <<<
Well, i uninstalled parallels this week, in favour of a Triple Boot OSX/UBUNTU/XP Macbook. I just got sick of waiting for Tools for Linux and 3D acceleration.
Don't get me wrong, i think parallels is a great program and i'm still going to watch it's growth with enthusiasm, but it's current limitations are to great for it to be anything but a toy for me..
I fear that parallels will lose most 'nix users soon unless a little more attention is sent their way..
chrisj303
Don't get me wrong, i think parallels is a great program and i'm still going to watch it's growth with enthusiasm, but it's current limitations are to great for it to be anything but a toy for me..
I fear that parallels will lose most 'nix users soon unless a little more attention is sent their way..
chrisj303
Coon said:dlundh, make love, not war, dude.
If you want to switch to Fusion - just go away and switch and do not throw your bullshit over forum.
I paid my $80 tax to Parallals, I have every right to complain over ttheir non-existent support. The only bullshitter here seems to be you. Defending a company that shafts their customers? Shame on you.
Parallelogram
Member
AFAIK the pricing for VMWare Fusion has not been announced, but their Windows virtualization products start at about $189 and continue up from there... WAY up.
VMWare is primarily an enterprise-level, "industrial strength" solution. Frankly, I don't think there is any chance whatsoever that Fusion will be something I could afford to purchase for personal use.
VMWare is primarily an enterprise-level, "industrial strength" solution. Frankly, I don't think there is any chance whatsoever that Fusion will be something I could afford to purchase for personal use.
Personally I find Parallels Desktop nicer to use. I can't quite put my finger on it, it just seems to be more thought out.
My killer feature though (if you can call it a "feature") would be student pricing. I've been in contact with VMware and they said they could give me a student discount on Fusion which would be great, but if Parallels would too I'd stick with them.
My killer feature though (if you can call it a "feature") would be student pricing. I've been in contact with VMware and they said they could give me a student discount on Fusion which would be great, but if Parallels would too I'd stick with them.
dlundh the way you vote for Parallels - you pay for it. No one forced you to do this. Parallels have very bad support, i know it, you know it. And everybody know it. But why all of us need to read so much negative stuff? Can your words written here help you to be more happy?
My opinion - Parallels is the good product, nice, faster than VMware beta, sometimes less buggy, sometimes more buggy. I will switch to VMware only if they will realize 3d support.
And if Fusion will be free - you will not have any support. Remember it.
My opinion - Parallels is the good product, nice, faster than VMware beta, sometimes less buggy, sometimes more buggy. I will switch to VMware only if they will realize 3d support.
And if Fusion will be free - you will not have any support. Remember it.
- Status