VMware Fusion Version 1.0, Build 51348 released!

[maestrokev]

Sweet, pre-ordered at discounted price and it has now been released:

http://www.vmware.com/support/fusion...es_fusion.html

Looks like no new features from RC1, just cleaned up bugs, here's forum discussion: http://www.vmware.com/community/thre...96956&tstart=0

[other]

How does VirtualBox compare to these commercial alternatives? It doesn't have "coherency mode" and whatever it's called in VMWare, but besides that?

[offwidafairies]

cool. although i'll only be running windows on my mac if its a last resort

[r-sparks]

Originally Posted by other

How does VirtualBox compare to these commercial alternatives? It doesn't have "coherency mode" and whatever it's called in VMWare, but besides that?

I've never used VirtualBox but I can say that the Unity (coherence) mode of Fusion is pretty impressive. Program windows from the Windows virtual machines really do appear as program windows on OS X, complete with Dock buttons (although this is a little buggy in RC1 of Fusion and they stick around after the program has quit). Note that only Windows apps have Unity. Linux or Solaris doesn't.

That said, it's not perfect. The windows are laggy/glitchy when dragged around. This might just be issues with the RC1 release, however.

I use Unity mode to run DRM crapware such as the BBC's iPlayer. I can run WMP11 in a window on the desktop, while browsing or using other OS X apps.

[stormdrums]

Originally Posted by other

How does VirtualBox compare to these commercial alternatives? It doesn't have "coherency mode" and whatever it's called in VMWare, but besides that?

virtualbox is a good choice if you only have tu run windows apps once a week on your mac or if you do not have enough money to buy parallels or fusion.
in my opinion parallels user interface is better because of the smartselect feature and coherence, which works pretty well. vmware fusion has unity ("same" as coherence) but fusion didn't work very well in my tests.
as far as i know parallels allows to use less than 2 gigs of ram for all virtual machines and you can only assign one processing core to a virtual machine.
as i bought a quadcore mac pro with 8 gigs of ram, i'll be happy if fusion becomes stable, because it could use more ressources to do work faster.

[maestrokev]

Well-timed to coincide with the Apple August 7th announcement.

What Apple needs is more development in virtualization software. As a recent Mac switcher myself the only thing stopping me from selling off my Windows boxes and buying more Macs is the lack of stable virtualization software. Boot Camp is nice but I don't want to reboot. Parallels ... well, just read their support forums.

[other]

Originally Posted by stormdrums

virtualbox is a good choice if you only have tu run windows apps once a week on your mac or if you do not have enough money to buy parallels or fusion.

Is that simply because of cohesion/unity, or is there something else?

I am kind of interested in the DirectX 8.1 support. I wonder if I could use Project 64 in a virtual machine. Has anybody tried?

[redAPPLE]

has there been a general consensus which is better? vmware or parallels?

[sonicboom]

Originally Posted by redAPPLE

has there been a general consensus which is better? vmware or parallels?

Depends.

If you want 64bit and/or Multiprocessor support for the Guest OS, then vmware. Parallels cannot do this.

[aristotle]

Originally Posted by redAPPLE

has there been a general consensus which is better? vmware or parallels?

VMWare is better as it allows you to leverage multiple cores that you might have in your system while parallels does not. I was an early adopter of Parallels but then I tried out the betas of VMWare fusion and I was sold on it.

As others have pointed out, the 1.0 release version belies the code heritage behind the mac product. It is based on their VM Workstation product which is now in version 6.

[Kelmon]

My experience with Parallels has been pretty good so I'm looking to see some major reasons for switching to Fusion before trying it out. I've not installed the latest version of Parallels since I'm not prepared to try beta software for production data but v3 works fine for me at the moment, although there are a few niggles.

At the least I'd like to know what the performance difference is between them on a C2D MacBook Pro.

[Arnaud]

If I understand correctly, Parallels is already working on Desktop 4.0, is that what the mentioned "beta" is about?

...

Is it me, or is time going really fast? Parallels only released Desktop 3.0 two months ago! (Or was it three?)

It is nice (and necessary) that companies work on updates and improvements, but soon we'll have to pay a new licence every 3 months for bug-correction and obvious improvements, going from Desktop 35 to Desktop 36.
I'm still on Desktop 2.0, I did not feel like paying yet again 6 months after my initial licence, for features which should have been included.

[davenet]

Originally Posted by Kelmon

My experience with Parallels has been pretty good so I'm looking to see some major reasons for switching to Fusion before trying it out. I've not installed the latest version of Parallels since I'm not prepared to try beta software for production data but v3 works fine for me at the moment, although there are a few niggles.

At the least I'd like to know what the performance difference is between them on a C2D MacBook Pro.

I've been using Parallels since early June. I find that Fusion uses alot less RAM for my VM configuration. I have a 512MB chunk set aside to run Windows XP. Right now Fusion is using 72MB real memory and about 427MB virtual. Parallels was usually north of 300MB real and 1GB virtual.

David

[rodti]

Originally Posted by other

I am kind of interested in the DirectX 8.1 support. I wonder if I could use Project 64 in a virtual machine. Has anybody tried?

Hah, I like the idea of emulating within an emulator....

[Rod76]

I’ve used both VMware and Parallels and own both and I kicked Parallels to the curb as soon as VMware hit RC1. I‘ve since stopped having Kernel Panics and related network issues. VMware in RC1 does have some system slow downs at times, but remains stable and I’ve really come to prefer it. All it really needs to be perfect is some of Parallels VM management features and its the perfect product.

[other]

Originally Posted by rodti

Hah, I like the idea of emulating within an emulator....

VMWare isn't an emulator though.

[r-sparks]

If you're thinking of buying Fusion, wait until some more people have posted their reports of the 1.0 release. In fact, you might want to wait until the 1.1 release.

I've been using the RC1 for a few weeks and while it's stable and hasn't crashed, the coherence/Unity mode isn't bug free. Additionally, there are often a few moments of lockup (when quitting Fusion, for example; new programs can't be launched for around 20 seconds even though Fusion no longer appears to be running). This is on both a 2GB MacBook and a 2GB iMac C2D.

I've reported these bugs but was brushed aside, with the support staff saying they're unique to my systems. From what I read, the 1.0 release only fixes a handful of "major" bugs to do with crashes, and applies some new artwork.

Also, if you buy in the UK, be aware that you'll be taxed for VAT but you won't be told about this additional charge UNTIL AFTER you've clicked to place the order. I complained about this, which is illegal in my country, but they never replied to me.

[Littleodie914]

Has the graphics acceleration gotten any better?

[bobobo]

Good times.

[nlivo]

this means nothing to me until i get my macbook with leopard on it at the start of november.

[eric_n_dfw]

Damn! I was going to buy it on the 50% off pre-order deal and didn't realize it was ending so fast.

Oh well.

[MacDonaldsd]

Originally Posted by r-sparks

Also, if you buy in the UK, be aware that you'll be taxed for VAT but you won't be told about this additional charge UNTIL AFTER you've clicked to place the order. I complained about this, which is illegal in my country, but they never replied to me.

That did irritate me, there was zero indication of it and 17.5% isn't just an extra few pennies.

[aristotle]

Originally Posted by MacDonaldsd

That did irritate me, there was zero indication of it and 17.5% isn't just an extra few pennies.

Complain to your Labour MPs about the bloody high taxes then.

[r-sparks]

Originally Posted by aristotle

Complain to your Labour MPs about the bloody high taxes then.

i think you misunderstand. It's not the tax we're complaining about. It's the fact that the tax isn't shown until AFTER you've clicked the "Purchase" button... After you've seen the "Total" column showing just the stated price.

The "Confirmation of your order" then screen suddenly shows a higher amount, due to the tax, which hitherto hadn't been mentioned. You can't rescind the order because, hey, it's already been placed when you clicked that "Purchase" button.

I bought the $40 pre-order offer because it's half price of Parallels, which would be my first choice. With the $8 of tax added, you're nudging $50, and that's only $30 less than Parallels.

I assume that if you order right now, you have to pay $80, plus the VAT. That makes it quite a bit more expensive than Parallels for UK users.

As you probably know, if you buy software from an American company as an online download, you normally don't pay tax. I've bought countless shareware apps and never, ever paid a penny of tax, either US or VAT.

Tax is added to Fusion's purchase because VMware has an Irish office which handles the sale. Oh, and that too isn't mentioned until the "Confirmation" screen, so I couldn't even second-guess that tax *might* be added.

It's actually illegal to do this. I complained to invoice@vmware.com around four weeks ago, but have got no reply. This wasn't a good introduction to VMware as a company. A bit sharky, in fact. Somebody ought to call BBC Watchdog

[inkhead]

It's simple to choose VMware Fusion.

Fusion is a native Cocoa Application.
Parallels uses QTKit, It's like using java!

Parallels installs nasty kernel extensions to work.
Fusion DOES NOT

Parallels modifies your windows partition boot files, everytime you use it with bootcamp, if it gets stuck in between, it will destroy your entire partition.
Fusion does not.

VMware Fusion has REAL USB 2.0 support, not "fake" support like parallels where they add every single device in. Fusion works with ANY USB 2.0 device because it is a cocoa app, and has access to proper libraries instead of qtapp.