VMware Fusion goes Beta

Rahul writes "Fusion is a new VMware product that enables Intel-based Macs to run Windows and Linux in virtual machines on Mac OS X. The Mac virtualization market is presently dominated by Parallels and it will be worth watching if VMware can gain the mindshare despite its late entry. Ars Technica reports: 'The nice thing about VMWare Fusion is that it already supports some of the stuff that the Parallels Beta2 released yesterday just added, such as USB 2.0 and most USB devices, CD/DVD drive support, and drag-and-drop between environments (unless the guest environment is Linux, that is). You can also run multiple Fusion environments at once or assign multiple processors to your virtual machine(s), if you're into that sort of thing.'"

Competition is a GREAT thing

[Wulfstan]

Although I guess I can sympathize with Parallels, who have spotted a niche and gone for it, I think that competition is great. It will be particularly interesting to see whether or not VMWare charge for this or whether it's just a freebie a la VMWare Player on the PC - I suppose it's likely they'll charge for it though. In any case, I'll be buying it, along with my Parallels license. And hey, may the best product win.

Multi-CPU support?

[jarich]

Parallels runs great and the windowed mode is awesome... but if this version of VM Ware actually supports both of the cores on my MBP, it might make a huge performance improvement.

I've downloaded it and have a VMWare image downloading...

The Parallels tools have things like image import that VMWare is missing though.

why does linux lag windows in features?

[rritterson]

I use Parallels, but only for Linux (MATLAB, which is not OS X/Intel native yet). I've noticed that the features available for virtualizing Windows are far beyond those available for Linux, and that it's only getting worse. According to the article summary, the same is true for VMWare.

For example, I cannot:
-Install Parallels tools for linux, so everytime I suspend my VM, the clock freezes and ends up several days behind schedule when I resume
-Use the nifty new feature that eliminates the Windows desktop and instead just shows the application window on the OS X desktop
-Copy and paste directly between machines (I have to rsync between hosts, though because the VM IP is changing, is only convenient in one direction)
-Easily change resolutions of the Linux VM.

The list goes on.

Now, is this because Windows is just what everyone is running in a VM, so all of the resources are going toward it, or is there some inherent difficulty in replicating these features in Linux. As an aside, couldn't someone in the OSS community (I am not talented enough, sorry) program Linux-based additions to faciliate some of those features, above (like the clock sync)?

It's compatible with the other VMWare products!

[MarcQuadra]

What I really wanted was compatibility with VMWare's other apps, and they delivered. I can justify a Mac at my desk if I can author sessions that eventually live up on our server farm.

Interoperability is HUGE when it comes to virtualization. There's a lot of value to being able to 'build' a server in my bedroom and upload it to bigger metal when I get to work. Parallels didn't have that, VMWare does. I'm going with VMWare.

parallels and vmware

[christurkel]

Parallells is slick andif you run one of their supported OSes, it is nice. However, VMWare supports a much wider range of OSes. No one has built, let's say, SkyOS images for Parallels but they have for VMWare.

I want a gaming designed VM

[Cadallin]

When is somebody going to do this? Hell, when is somebody going to fork Dosbox and turn it into something usable? Dosbox has an immense amount of cool technical work in it, but the UI absolutely unusable. Why can't we have an actual Virtual Machine environment that can boot DOS from a disk image, and provide excellent sound support, and CGA/EGA/VGA/VESA graphics support? And *gasp* how about joystick support on par with most NES, SNES, etc emulators? Furthermore, how about some sensible CPU speed scaling? Like every other emulator for other platforms has available.

Re:Multi-CPU support?

[LiquidCoooled]

Heres something I found in the furums [parallels.com]:

Hello all!

Now you can migrate your Windows PC, VMware or Virtual PC Virtual Machines to Parallels Virtual Machines.

You will need Parallels Transporter Beta for this. The Mac version is bundled into Parallels Desktop for Mac Beta Build 3036. The Windows version containing both Parallels Transporter and Parallels Transporter Agent can be downloaded from here.

1. Usage models.

* Migrate remote Windows PC over network directly to VM on your Mac/PC
1) Install Parallels Transporter Agent on your Windows PC you would like to migrate
2) Run Parallels Transporter on your Mac/PC
3) Migrate using few easy steps of Wizard

* Migrate Windows PC locally or to any removable media and move the resulted VM to Mac/PC
1) Install both Parallels Transporter and Parallels Transporter Agent on your Windows PC you would like to migrate
2) Run Parallels Transporter on that Windows PC
3) Migrate using few easy steps of Wizard
4) Deliver the resulting virtual machine to Mac/PC using any removable media

* Converting VMware Workstation/Server or Microsoft Virtual PC VMs to Parallels Desktop/Workstation-compatible format and move resulting Virtual Machine to Mac/PC
1) Install Parallels Transporter on your Windows PC
2) Run Parallels Transporter
3) Convert VM using few easy steps of Wizard
4) Deliver the resulting virtual machine to Mac/PC using any removable media

2. Supported OSes.

Parallels Transporter Agent is the provider which allows online migration of Windows PC:

* Windows 2000
* Windows XP
* Windows 2003

Parallels Transporter is the application which finally creates Parallels virtual machines:

* Windows 2000
* Windows XP
* Windows 2003
* Windows Vista (experimental support)
* Mac OS X

We are extremely interested in your feedback - please share your thoughts or technical issues to [e-mail] mailbox.

Best regards,
Tim and all the Parallels Team

Re:Snapshots?

[0racle]

Right now, no it doesn't. They also won't comment on upcoming features so you don't know if it will or not. If it doesn't though I believe that it will be the only one of VMware's virtualization software that doesn't so that's pretty unlikely.

It seems to pretty much be VMware Workstation on OS X so I would expect it to have pretty much the same features eventually.

OS X in VMWare.

[MikeFM]

I like being able to run OS X in VMWare. Thank gawd for hacked copies since Apple refuses to sell OS X for this use and you have to jump through hoops to make it work. Makes it handy to test out programs and web sites you're developing.

Re:Multi-CPU support?

[yabos]

I guess you're right. Mine says I have a Core2Duo so I thought it saw both cores, but I just downloaded CPU-Z and it shows only one core.

Re:Competition is a GREAT thing

[aztracker1]

I will say that VMWare will probably beat out parallels on pricing, depending on how they target their offering. Given that VMWare Server, and VMWare Player are free, and that they make their big money on the big server and workstation (targeting pro/developer) versions.

What would be *REALLY* cool, is if Apple would release a version of OSX Server that will run under VMWare, and for VMWare to have an enterprise version for OSX Server. Buying and running OSX Server on non-apple hardware would be way cool. Apple could still have a level of release control, if they struck a deal with VMWare on this.

Re:I want a gaming designed VM

[Cadallin]

"2D games probably work well enough" is not true. Dosbox, as I've noted, has an absolutely lousy interface, most games will run OK, once (and if) you can get them installed and set up, and even for those that work, you have to duplicate a large part of setup every time you launch the application. However, due to their approach of duplicating dos functionality in a Window, if the game requires more obscure dos commands to perform its installation, it will barf and die. More Enterprise oriented Virtual Machines/Emulators lack a lot of Hardware support, and sound is generally poorly implemented, if at all, patchy Soundblaster 16 support ain't cutting it.