Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

VMware Fusion 7 Launches with Virtualization Support for OS X Yosemite and Windows 8.1

BigHonkingDeal said:
It runs just fine though......
Click to expand...

Care to explain please. There are numerous threads around the net that claim otherwise, and I have version 5 and was waiting for this to upgrade to run Yosemite.

My work calls for 2 programs in a widows environment, so I have been running VM fusion for more years than I remember.

So, if your statement is indeed correct, this would save a lot of people $ from upgrading. However, even VMware's forums state that 6 is not compatible.

I have to upgrade regardless, as I am still on 5 currently, I skipped last years update.
 
Steve121178 said:
What's to fix? They are two separate installs so you need two licenses.
Click to expand...

That's a shame, no work around? I was going to cross grade from Parallels to Fusion but I guess this puts a stop to that.

Parallels offers this capability without needing a second license.
 
steve23094 said:
That's a shame, no work around? I was going to cross grade from Parallels to Fusion but I guess this puts a stop to that.

Parallels offers this capability without needing a second license.
Click to expand...

I'm not getting into whether or not it's in the scope of the Windows license, but yes, VMWare Fusion works this way just fine. With VMWare tools installed, activation in Windows 8 works in both Bootcamp and Fusion, with the same Windows installation.
 
Just upgraded from Professional 6 to Professional 7 this morning. Upgrade process was smooth. However, they *still* haven't fixed the bug I've been encountering since I installed version 6.0.1 last year where the USB dongle that is required for the only software program I use XP for is not automatically attached to the XP VM on boot. Every time I cold boot the XP VM, I have to go to Settings --> USB and Bluetooth --> Connect Aladdin USB Key. Every prior version up to 6.0.1 auto-connected this Aladdin USB dongle to the XP VM fine.

I see they've added a setting in the USB settings to "forget" the USB device associations. I saw that and thought there might be a glimmer of hope but I clicked it, unplugged my USB hub, plugged the hub back in, reassigned all my USB devices to connect to the Mac or XP as appropriate, shut down the XP VM, started it back up, and the Aladdin USB dongle still did not auto-connect to the XP VM.

Off to report the bug to VMware (which I could've sworn I've already done)...
 
chrfr said:
I'm not getting into whether or not it's in the scope of the Windows license, but yes, VMWare Fusion works this way just fine. With VMWare tools installed, activation in Windows 8 works in both Bootcamp and Fusion, with the same Windows installation.
Click to expand...

With an upgrade license, or full retail? Last time I tried with my upgrade license, it didn't activate under VMWare, even with the tools installed.
 
Winni said:
Well, I'm an "IT person" and I prefer Windows 8.1 (in desktop mode, if you want to call it that) over any of its predecessors. Why? It's MUCH faster than Win 7 or XP. It's more secure out of the box than any other desktop OS on the market. It's rock solid.

All that being said - if you NEED to run Windows on a Mac - or a PC that is supposed to run Linux as its main operating system - you have chosen the wrong main platform for your daily work. You should have stayed with Windows, period.

Virtualization is awesome - but as I've said, I'm an "IT person". I run dozens of production servers on a VMWare vSphere cluster. Solutions like VMWare Fusion are awesome for developers and for learning and testing purposes.

But like I've said, if you NEED such a tool on your desktop machine to run an application that you NEED for your daily work - you should have chosen Windows as your main platform, period. It doesn't make any sense to double your platform complexity and maintenance costs just because you bought into some hype and decided to go with an OS that does not have the application software that you NEED.
Click to expand...

Software engineer here, I also virtualise W8.1 and use it in my main machine, simply because it's miles better than 7. Yeah the OS is a bit messy, but everything else is better. Even simple stuff like the task manager.
More examples for people asking: it's faster in games, starts up quicker, etc.
 
nicbrown said:
It is a farce of a situation. It is the same install running on the same hardware. The fact that at times, I want to run it on a virtual cpu is an entirely arbitrary line to draw.

Microsoft can dictate hardline license terms if they want, but I dictate the terms by which my wallet operates.
Click to expand...

They are still two separate installs, so Microsoft haven't done anything wrong and you don't really have a serious complaint. What you want to do requires two separate licenses and that's pretty much the end of the discussion.

To implement any kind of workaround would lead to mass abuse and allow people to install Windows on 2 or more devices for free.

When my TechNet subscription ends it will start to cost me money per license once Windows 9 arrives, but that's a cost I know I will have to take. I'm fine with it.
 
Winni said:
Well, I'm an "IT person" and I prefer Windows 8.1 (in desktop mode, if you want to call it that) over any of its predecessors. Why? It's MUCH faster than Win 7 or XP. It's rock solid.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Windows 8.1 is the first Windows OS that has really impressed me from the start. Everything else all seemed really cobbled together, unsure of its direction.
 
throttlemeister said:
Where are all the comments like "annual subscription", "these upgrades should be free", "I will never buy from that company again" like we say in the Parallels thread? There is even less innovation warranting the upgrade prices in Fusion 7 than there is in Parallels 10.
Click to expand...
Yeah - I bought 2 versions of VMWare, and the second one was just after the MacBook Retina came out. I bought it to run on the Retina, and barely a month afterwards VMWare released an update to actually enable me to use the retina resolution with their product - and they expected me to pay almost full price (small discount) for this. If I knew they'd do that, I would have kept my old version and waited a month to buy.

In fact I did pay up, and get that next version, but I've refused point blank to get another version since then, and I'm unlikely to buy any other version until I replace the MacBook (probably another 2 years yet at least). They screwed me once, but I'll be damned if they'll do it again, no matter how much sunshine and butterfly farts they include in their latest shiny software.

-- Pete.

Edit: I just checked my history, and it seems I initially purchased 3 versions of VMWare Fusion, v1, v3, and v4. I bought v4 just over a month before v5 was launched, and I had to fight to get a discount to Fusion v5. I received the discount, but it was so much hassle and bad will (about 6 weeks between buying the previous version and the new version being announced, and after I had raised a specific support ticket about retina issues on v4 even before v5 was announced, and then they want me to PAY for the fix!) that I pledged never to upgrade from v5 until I replace the MacBook.
 
Last edited:
AppleInTheMud said:
Can anyone give me just one reason, why to buy this if you want to run Windows on your Mac? We have Bootcamp and it's free - With VMware you have to pay for both Windows and VMware.

VMware must be slower than running a real install. And it costs you more.
Click to expand...
Boot Camp requires re-partitioning your hard drive. You have to know (in advance) what the maximum amount of space that your Windows system will use is, and then you immediately lose that entire amount of space from your OS X partition. Think you'll need 100 GB but only actually end up using 40 GB? You just wasted 60 GB of disk.

With virtualization software (like Fusion), Windows (or whatever OS you're working with) is stored in a folder on your Mac .. no partitioning required. The size of this folder only grows as you add things to Windows. So if you think you need 100 GB, but only end up using 40 GB, then the folder size is only 40 GB.

That, and you can drag 'n drop the folder (of your virtual machine) anywhere you want. Want to move Windows to an external USB drive because your Mac's internal HDD is filling up? Piece of cake. Try doing that with Boot Camp. (good luck).

You are right that in a few scenarios (i.e. heavy-duty graphics are required), virtual machines can be a little slower that running Windows natively via Boot Camp. But for most of what folks need Windows for on a Mac, there is no noticeable performance impact from running Windows virtually at the same time Mac OS X is running, IMO.
 
throttlemeister said:
Where are all the comments like "annual subscription", "these upgrades should be free", "I will never buy from that company again" like we say in the Parallels thread? There is even less innovation warranting the upgrade prices in Fusion 7 than there is in Parallels 10.
Click to expand...

It's getting out of hand. I'm getting tired of paying for marginal upgrades. This is like the second or third version to tout "Retina Display Optimization" as a major reason to buy.

That being said, I'm sure I'll fork over more cash for it, as I need it and I still prefer it over Parallels.
 
irnchriz said:
OK, I'll bite, superior in what way?
Click to expand...

The only area I've encountered where it isn't as good as 7 or better, is the stupid start screen and their take on full-screen apps. But even in the start screen, they're approaching the effectiveness of OS X's Spotlight search, so that too is a clear bonus for Win 8.1 users.

Win 8.1 also is a lot snappier than Win 7 and seems to do better on older hardware. Win 8.1 has taken Microsoft's new-found security thinking a bit further than Win 7 and enabled even more security features by default, which means less chance of needing to help your Windows-based friends and relatives with their computers.

Native ISO file support is a good thing.

The Task Manager seems a bit better, as does the file copy/move process. And, of course, native support for much of the hardware that has been released since Win 7 means less reliance on third-party suppliers to get their drivers right.
 
irnchriz said:
OK, I'll bite, superior in what way?
Click to expand...

Rock solid performance, rock solid stability, lots of changes to the UI and functionality from within the desktop and a whole heap of stuff that makes it more efficient to do things.

There's not a large difference in terms of the look and feel from within the desktop, but it's better than Windows 7 in every area and anyone who disagrees is simply wrong unless they can come up with valid reasons why the old Windows 7 code somehow outperforms Windows 8.1.

As for the modern Start Screen, I'm not a huge fan of it but I rarely need to use the modern apps, so there's no reason to stomp my feet and cry like a little girl about it.

When it comes to Virtualization, Windows 8.1 is in a different class to Windows 7. It performs so much better that I simply deleted all my Windows 7 VM's as it was a day and night difference.
 
VMWare Fusion 7 - why?

Having used Parallels and Fusion and been ripped off by constant upgrade costs I now use Virtual Box which is free and for my needs does the same thing.
 
roland.g said:
No one really wants to run Windows 8.anything on a PC, let alone on a Mac. Any Windows user or IT person I know either uses Win 7 Pro still or wishes they could.
Click to expand...

I recently installed Windows 8.1 in a VM on a Mac Pro. I did it to extend the support lifetime, as I was migrating from Windows XP after support was ended. I just didn't want to worry about it again until the distant future.

You can make Windows 8.x look almost exactly like Window 7 or even Windows XP by installing an alternative shell. I use http://www.classicshell.net/.
 
flexiboy said:
Having used Parallels and Fusion and been ripped off by constant upgrade costs I now use Virtual Box which is free and for my needs does the same thing.
Click to expand...

If it does, then that's perfect. Virtual Box does have some performance and feature issues compared to the other two, though. For professional use, the cost of Fusion is negligible.
 
Dranix said:
It's mighty expensive if you use it to play with Linux and FreeBSD... I'm not against payed updates, but yearly around 50eur is mad.
Click to expand...

If you just want to play with alternate OS's (other than OS X), try VirtualBox: http://www.virtualbox.org/. It's open source, originally from Sun, and now supported by Oracle.

I use it to run a Windows 8.1 instance on my Mac Pro. It doesn't have to be particularly fast, as I only need it for one application that I use a couple of times each day.

I also use it on my work laptop to run multiple CentOS instances at the same time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back