VMware Fusion 3 to Launch October 27th

[arkmannj]

Don't suppose Fusion 3.0 (or the impending Parallels ) support accessing devices on the ExpressCard slot ? this would remove my only need to Boot Camp.

 

[dyn]

I suggest that you read the references from the Intel System Programming Guides, rather than the brief, often misleading, paraphrases on Wikipedia.

Look on page Vol. 3 27-11, where it says:



VT-x does *not* eliminate the need for the VMM/hypervisor to emulate privileged instructions, it just gives a simpler way for the VMM/hypervisor to trap these instructions (without VT-x, "binary translation" is required).

Even with VT-x, some instructions have to be emulated.

Indeed, "some" not "all" as you implied in your first post. If you take a look at the whole thing it is not 100% emulation (thank you for agreeing with me on that, it would be very weird if you didn't since the rest of the world does agree with me). Apart from that your quote still does not say I'm wrong on the part that the vm won't be able to get to the hardware.

Let go of the old-school Apple PowerPC notion that "emulation" means only full ISA emulation.

Even if the VM sees "exactly" the same environment as the host OS - there's clearly emulation going on. The host OS thinks it has a PC. The guest OS thinks it has a PC. Since there's only one PC, yet two systems see a unique PC - clearly one of them is looking at an emulated PC. Start 4 more VMs - now you have one PC, and 6 systems thinking that they have unique PCs. Some emulation's happening here.

The vm sees pc components. Some of those components are the same as in the machine itself like the cpu, some are virtualised (or emulated if you want to call it that...). If it were emulated it means it is faked 100% and it only exists on a software level which it clearly doesn't nowadays.

Personally, I think that you're better off going with what AidenShaw said....

For the correct information I'll happily stick to what Parallels, VMware, Sun, Microsoft, Citrix, Intel and AMD are saying, they know there are differences between emulators and virtualisation software Virtualisation and emulation look a like but are not the same thing. There are important differences and with virtualisation the vm can get to the hardware directly opposed to emulation.

Once more virtualisation != emulation and virtual machines are able to access the hardware directly but not just all of the hardware. That's just exactly why it's not emulation but virtualisation. In other words: mind the fact that the story is a lot more nuanced than the story you put in your first post.

 

[AidenShaw]

Indeed, "some" not "all" as you implied in your first post. If you take a look at the whole thing it is not 100% emulation (thank you for agreeing with me on that, it would be very weird if you didn't since the rest of the world does agree with me).

Please, please break out of your Apple PowerPC mindset that insists that "it's only called 'emulation' if it's 100% ISA emulation".

Virtualization and emulation are practically synonyms. If it's "virtualized" you're seeing something that not exactly the same as the physical world. If it's "emulated" you're seeing something's that not exactly the same as the physical world.

When I look at one of my VMs, it's reporting that it's running on a "dual core Core i7-940 (2.93 GHz)". Since Intel never made such a beast, clearly it's emulating something that does not exist.

If I replace every time you use "emulation" with "ISA emulation", we're much closer to agreeing.

Apart from that your quote still does not say I'm wrong on the part that the vm won't be able to get to the hardware.

You're looking at a few sentences from a several MB PDF, and saying that it doesn't prove anything?

Why would the VMM/hypervisor need to emulate guest instructions, except to keep the VM away from direct access to the hardware?

The whole concept of VMEXIT in VT is that "the VM attempted to do something to the hardware that it is not permitted to do, therefore we exit the VM and return to the VMM/hypervisor".

The vm sees pc components. Some of those components are the same as in the machine itself like the cpu, some are virtualised (or emulated if you want to call it that...). If it were emulated it means it is faked 100% and it only exists on a software level which it clearly doesn't nowadays.

Here we have a semantic difference - I would say that if any part of the environment is emulated, then it is an emulated environment. Apparently you would say that if it is 99% emulated, it's real.

For the correct information I'll happily stick to what Parallels, VMware, Sun, Microsoft, Citrix, Intel and AMD are saying, they know there are differences between emulators and virtualisation software Virtualisation and emulation look a like but are not the same thing.

I agree if you put "ISA" in front of each use of "emulate".

There are important differences and with virtualisation the vm can get to the hardware directly opposed to emulation.

Disagree here. The VM only has partial access to the hardware, and has to depend on the VMM/hypervisor to mediate access to certain hardware features.

Different levels of VT decrease the number of VMEXITS that occur. In essense, the VMM software structures are moving into the hardware - so the virtualization happens in the CPU. The EPT, for example, lets the VMM set up "virtual page tables" so that the VMM doesn't have to trap and emulate these - the emulation is done in silicon.

Once more virtualisation != emulation and virtual machines are able to access the hardware directly but not just all of the hardware. That's just exactly why it's not emulation but virtualisation. In other words: mind the fact that the story is a lot more nuanced than the story you put in your first post.

Again, s;emulat;ISA emulat;g and I agree.

Break out of the old-school Apple PowerPC / VirtualPC mindset.

 

[dyn]

Please, please break out of your Apple PowerPC mindset that insists that "it's only called 'emulation' if it's 100% ISA emulation".

Virtualization and emulation are practically synonyms. If it's "virtualized" you're seeing something that not exactly the same as the physical world. If it's "emulated" you're seeing something's that not exactly the same as the physical world.

The only one that is in the PowerPC mindset or even the hardware mindset and thus concluding that virtualisation and emulations are synonyms is you. I never owned a PowerPC nor do I know that much about the architecture. I do know certain emulators and things as OS-level virtualisation such as FreeBSD jails and Solaris containers.

When I look at one of my VMs, it's reporting that it's running on a "dual core Core i7-940 (2.93 GHz)". Since Intel never made such a beast, clearly it's emulating something that does not exist.

Mine reports the same cpu as OS X does (system profiler and sysctl) on all of my Macs (see profile). You do know that there are various programs on the market that actually need support to recognize the cpu in the machine? They have to be updated whenever a new cpu is released to update their list of known cpus. Quite a few are unable to properly recognize the correct cpu. If you're running a Mac Pro than it doesn't surprise me the cpu is being recognized as an Core i7 (basically its what the Xeons are based on).

If I replace every time you use "emulation" with "ISA emulation", we're much closer to agreeing.

Maybe.

You're looking at a few sentences from a several MB PDF, and saying that it doesn't prove anything?

Ehh, you are the one quoting a few lines from a several MB pdf to say someone is wrong. If you look at more than just one pdf it made a bit more sense. You also did quickly disregard the Wikipedia links I gave without even looking at them (there are different kinds of virtualisation such as OS-level virtualisation, those links were also a hint to look further than just Wikipedia and have people do a bit of research of their own). Also, it only takes a few sentences to prove something is wrong, that's how they do it in science. If only 1 small part of Newton's theory is proven to be untrue the entire theory is false.

You're not getting my point. You initially said virtualisation == emulation which you are still doing. You also said something about the vm not being able to get to the hardware. This is not true as the document proves it and so do the Wikipedia links I gave. My point is that virtualisation and emulation have similarities but also differences and that those differences are the reason why they are not equal. So yes, there is some emulation going on but not everything is being emulated and not always (e.g. the aforementioned OS-level virtualisation). Which is exactly what the part from the document you quoted says!

Here we have a semantic difference - I would say that if any part of the environment is emulated, then it is an emulated environment. Apparently you would say that if it is 99% emulated, it's real.

Nope, I'd see 99% is fake and 1% is real. However with virtualisation it simply does not mean everything you see is fake as is the case with things such as FreeBSD jails.

Disagree here. The VM only has partial access to the hardware, and has to depend on the VMM/hypervisor to mediate access to certain hardware features.

Exactly: partially access, quite different from the "no access" in your first reply.

Break out of the old-school Apple PowerPC / VirtualPC mindset.

Please do There's a lot more to virtualisation than you think.

 

[appleden]

vmware does not pay their rebates

Effectively they are: Fusion 2.0 on Amazon is now $40 with a $10 rebate, since it is bought after 10/1 you'd qualify for a free upgrade to 3.0. If you are a Parallels user they "competitive upgrade" to Fusion 2.0 is $30, so you'd get Fusion 3.0 for $10 net.

FWIW yesterday before the announcement it was $27-$10 MIR.

B

It has been my experience that vmware and smithmicro do not pay their rebates, so what is the difference?

 

[Avro]

I tried to upgrade to VmWare Fusion 3 (I have 2). Unfortunately the order page is rubbish. It recongized me but told me that my VmWare Fusion 2 was not eligible for an upgrade . Then it asked me to register my software. I reregistered it with an update to my email address. It stated that the info would be actionable within 30 mins. Still no luck and their phone lines are closed.

I shall phone them later today.

 

[polaris20]

http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxgames/

It support Lef4Dead and many other Source games... it is cheap and it didn't require Windows.

Performance is pretty bad though, specifically with L4D. I get 70 frames per second with medium settings in BC using Windows 7 RC, and with Crossover Games I got like 15-20.

 

[jeme]

Are there any user reviews out on Fusion 3 yet? I am a new mac user and considering this compared to parells 4.0. Thanks!

 

[rmchale]

I tried to upgrade to VmWare Fusion 3 (I have 2). Unfortunately the order page is rubbish. It recongized me but told me that my VmWare Fusion 2 was not eligible for an upgrade . Then it asked me to register my software. I reregistered it with an update to my email address. It stated that the info would be actionable within 30 mins. Still no luck and their phone lines are closed.

I shall phone them later today.

Any luck? I tried @ 7:30am its now 10am.

 

[skinEman23]

Any luck? I tried @ 7:30am its now 10am.

Trial downloads seem to be down as well. It keeps saying that I need to confirm my account, but it never sends me a confirmation link.

 

[LagunaSol]

Are there any user reviews out on Fusion 3 yet? I am a new mac user and considering this compared to parells 4.0. Thanks!

Macworld had a "first look" at the software yesterday I believe.

I just downloaded the 3.0 trial but haven't tried it yet. I've been using Fusion 2.0 for some time. I haven't used Parallels since version 2, so I can't say how the two compare now, but my Parallels experience back then wasn't stellar.

 

[brewser]

Any luck? I tried @ 7:30am its now 10am.

The whole upgrade thing is a total mess. The site is really slow and it's having trouble with purchasing the upgrade. Read the Vmware forum for all the gory details. Really would like to get the upgrade but this is really upsetting.

 

[Roy]

I tried several times to by a copy on-line and after I put in my information several times, and all I got was a note saying they were busy and try back later, I called them at number for VMWare store. After holding for 45 minutes, and a recording telling me to hang on and that I could buy VMWare Fusion if I waiting for the next available person, when I did get a live person, I was told they do not sell it over the phone and I needed to try back in a few days at the website as the website is being reworked.