Why would anyone waste time with that? It’s a beta version that even says in the “read me” file: “If you want a smoother and more professional experience, try VirtualBuddy instead.”
https://github.com/insidegui/VirtualBuddy
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Parallels vs VMWare on M2 MBP?
- Thread starter Broric
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
https://github.com/insidegui/VirtualBuddy
It's more that reading the 11 blog posts provides a lot of background in how Apple silicon VMs work, how they are different to those with Intel, and why they are more restricted. I suggest that many people do not have a good grasp of the new VMs. Howard's VM articles are all listed about a third of the way down https://eclecticlight.co/m1-macs/.
I was talking about the Viable app, that recommends another better app.
Apple provides a sample code project that “demonstrates how to install and run macOS virtual machines (VMs) on Apple silicon”https://developer.apple.com/documen...os_in_a_virtual_machine_on_apple_silicon_macs
Based on that sample code project and documentation, many have build similar apps. Unlike Viable, most have made their code public.
https://github.com/evansm7/vftool
https://github.com/s-u/macosvm
https://github.com/jspahrsummers/Microverse
https://github.com/KhaosT/MacVM
https://github.com/insidegui/VirtualBuddy
https://github.com/cirruslabs/tart
https://github.com/Code-Hex/vz
virtualOS “is open source software, source code is available at: https://github.com/yep/virtualOS” and the free app in the App Store https://apps.apple.com/app/virtualos/id1614659226
And there are better things to read than those ramblings.
Starting with Apple’s documentation https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization
“Why Changes in Mac Virtualization Are Good for Apple IT Teams” https://blog.kandji.io/mac-virtualization
“Apple’s Virtualization framework is a great, free way to test new macOS betas”
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/202...-apps-to-safely-test-the-macos-ventura-betas/
UTM Documentation - Settings (Apple) https://docs.getutm.app/settings-apple/settings-apple/
Apple provides a sample code project that “demonstrates how to install and run macOS virtual machines (VMs) on Apple silicon”https://developer.apple.com/documen...os_in_a_virtual_machine_on_apple_silicon_macs
Based on that sample code project and documentation, many have build similar apps. Unlike Viable, most have made their code public.
https://github.com/evansm7/vftool
https://github.com/s-u/macosvm
https://github.com/jspahrsummers/Microverse
https://github.com/KhaosT/MacVM
https://github.com/insidegui/VirtualBuddy
https://github.com/cirruslabs/tart
https://github.com/Code-Hex/vz
virtualOS “is open source software, source code is available at: https://github.com/yep/virtualOS” and the free app in the App Store https://apps.apple.com/app/virtualos/id1614659226
And there are better things to read than those ramblings.
Starting with Apple’s documentation https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization
“Why Changes in Mac Virtualization Are Good for Apple IT Teams” https://blog.kandji.io/mac-virtualization
“Apple’s Virtualization framework is a great, free way to test new macOS betas”
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/202...-apps-to-safely-test-the-macos-ventura-betas/
UTM Documentation - Settings (Apple) https://docs.getutm.app/settings-apple/settings-apple/
Last edited:
My advice / vote for OP is for Parallels. It's got the fit and finish of an Apple product and it's very much a long term Apple first business. They have it nailed with the little niggles that the everyday user struggles with - dragging and dropping between Mac / Windows, File Sharing between them, sharing the network source, easy 'Which OS do you want this hard drive to connect to?' interface as and when you need it. And things like hardware / resource allocation already tuned and decided for you based on your Mac specs. Coherence works really well although I don't like it personally. When I tried VMWare Fusions and even VirtualBox on older Intel Macs in the past it was always a hassle sharing things between the systems. I preferred Boot Camp back then.
I must renew my Parallels... I hate the subscription model and I'd be lying if I said I noticed a difference year on year at least since I've been paying for it since 2019...
I must renew my Parallels... I hate the subscription model and I'd be lying if I said I noticed a difference year on year at least since I've been paying for it since 2019...
Another vote for Parallels. I've been using VMWare Fusion Pro for a very long time, but for the last few years it just doesn't do it for me. Time is money, don't like tinkering around. And on Silicon MAC parallels just worked. I also tried to go free with VirtualBox, but too many niggle with getting it to work with all systems, same with plain UTM in my experience.
Yep. Parallels is the most costly, but I'm not 14 anymore and have time tinkering around and optimizing everything. Parallels is so well designed and functional it feels like a native app.
There's now a VMware Fusion Tech Preview which greatly improves the experience of using Windows on Apple Silicon Macs, but the initial setup process of the Windows VM is still far more complex than that of Parallels. You can at least use Fusion for free, and with the Tech Preview you get all the Fusion Pro features for free. Given how poorly Fusion 13 worked with Windows on Apple Silicon, I am really hoping this is a free upgrade when it eventually ships:
VMware Fusion Tech Preview 2023 - VMware Fusion Blog
The Tech Preview adds 3d acceleration and drag and drop finally works.
VMware Fusion Tech Preview 2023 - VMware Fusion Blog
The Tech Preview adds 3d acceleration and drag and drop finally works.
I was losing the will to live trying to get the last version of Fusion working. I thought I was vaguely intelligent enough to get it working!
This new preview however, is like night and day. Much easier to master and I thoroughly recommend!
I tried to install Windows 11 and VMWarePro 13.0.2 on my MacStudio M1 and even after six hours it didn't succeed. I managed to install the beginning of Windows 11 but I couldn't connect to the internet even that I checked and switched all the network settings. Parallels is much more user friendly. I recommend Parallels.
I have read on several sources that VMWare Fusion doesn't work well on Silicon Macs and is difficult to install Windows 11. I have Parallels 18 and it's easy to use. However it's not optimised for Sonoma, I will upgrade if there is a price reduction (e.g. 25% on Black Friday?). Definitely another vote for Parallels.
VMware Fusion 13.5 | 19 OCT 2023 | Build 22583790
"What's New
Download and Install Windows 11 guest operating system on an Apple Silicon Mac
You can now download and install Windows 11 as a guest operating system from the Fusion user interface on an Apple Silicon Mac."
https://docs.vmware.com/en/VMware-Fusion/13.5/rn/vmware-fusion-135-release-notes/index.html
https://www.vmware.com/products/fusion/fusion-evaluation.html
"What's New
Download and Install Windows 11 guest operating system on an Apple Silicon Mac
You can now download and install Windows 11 as a guest operating system from the Fusion user interface on an Apple Silicon Mac."
https://docs.vmware.com/en/VMware-Fusion/13.5/rn/vmware-fusion-135-release-notes/index.html
https://www.vmware.com/products/fusion/fusion-evaluation.html
Thanks for the info. This version is way better than the previous one (13.0.2). I could finally install Windows 11 now and the VMWare tools. However I have the impression that Parallels is faster, especially in graphics.
Last edited:
That's not a fair comparison at all @Mac Hammer Fan. CPU wise they should be about the same. When you compare those screenshots you can easily see that one, those do not use the same version of windows (a minor issue) and two, that the VMWare Screenshot only has half the CPU cores allocated (while managing 60% of the multi CPU score). Also the Fusion scores are on reduced windows power mode.
@Rastafabi
Everything was tested on an M1 Mac Studio with 32 GB RAM. On Parallels there is no difference in speed between Home and Pro Windows. Both Virtual Machines were more than 100 GB disk space . It is also so that I can allocate more CPU cores in Parallels than in VMWare. I used on both the maximum CPU cores and for Geekbench 16 GB RAM.
Everything was tested on an M1 Mac Studio with 32 GB RAM. On Parallels there is no difference in speed between Home and Pro Windows. Both Virtual Machines were more than 100 GB disk space . It is also so that I can allocate more CPU cores in Parallels than in VMWare. I used on both the maximum CPU cores and for Geekbench 16 GB RAM.
Despite more GPU RAM was allocated to VMWare (4 GB) than Parallels (2GB), 2D graphics in Parallels are significantly faster.
Left Parallels right VMware. I don't know why VMWare gives only 2GHz CPU while on the same Mac Studio Parallels gives 3,2 GHz.
Perhaps there is something wrong, but I installed the VMWare Tools.
Left Parallels right VMware. I don't know why VMWare gives only 2GHz CPU while on the same Mac Studio Parallels gives 3,2 GHz.
Perhaps there is something wrong, but I installed the VMWare Tools.
Last edited:
Nonetheless, you can allocate 8 cores with the Pro version of Fusion so the comparison is still uneven. It'd be more useful to see how the two platforms compare with only 4 cores allocated, otherwise this benchmark comparison is pretty useless.
As you can see, Parallels with 4 cores is still better. 2D Graphics in VMWare is a disappointment. (see before)
Last edited:
I have the Pro version (test) and if I choose 8 cores I receive a message that it will slow down my computer and VMWare. But what really worries me is the low 2D graphics score.
This is true with any virtualization platform. If you allocate all the cores to your virtual machine, performance may suffer due to lack of resources available to run the rest of the computer/operating system/other apps.
I can choose 8 cores with Parallels without a problem but this isn't the case with VMWare. There they say 8 cores will slow down the app VMWare.
It's just that VMware chooses to put up a warning, not a difference in how things will actually behave.