VMware Launches 'Fusion 5' Virtualization Software, Parallels 8 Coming September 4

[sfilingeri]

For a brief moment I was so pissed that the new version came out today, I purchased Fusion 4 only a few days ago!

I was thinking "Oh thats freaking nice, there goes $50 down the drain" until I read that anybody who purchase after July 25 will get a free upgrade!

 

[mixel]

If parallels gaming performance gets the same sort of bump it usually does I'll happily pay to upgrade. Generally I've fount parallels to run games better than fusion.

I use parallels to run my bootcamp partition. A lot of games run great under it, and for those that need more grunt, at least this way I can download them (steam) while still using OSX, then boot into BC to play.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

But if you're comparing Apples to Apples, so to speak, processor intensive apps will run at pretty much the same speed, but graphics-intensive apps won't

Yes. Even H.264 encoding with MeGUI & x264 is no problem inside a Windows VM. GPU-based (DirectX) video filters run very slow.

 

[Andronicus]

This is the most awesome feature imo:

Image

You can finally create virtual networks!

Stupid question, but what does that mean?

Thanks!

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Does MWare Fusion 5 allow to virtualize Mac OS X 10.6.8 (Snow leopard) to run rosetta applications like Eudora, Canvas or Palm Desktop? VMware Fusion 4.1.0 allowed that.

If it supports the 32-Bit and 64-Bit server versions of Leopard and Snow Leopard, then it supports also the Client versions of 10.4.x*, 10.5.x, 10.6.x, 10.7.x and 10.8.x.

*it is not possible to install 10.4.x (the Intel version) inside a VM, if you do not have an existing 10.5.x or higher VM. You can install 10.4.x inside the 10.5.x (or higher) VM on a separate virtual disk.

 

[markcres]

I use my 2012 Macbook Air to run Windows 3.11 and MSDOS 6.22 under VirtualBox. Word for Windows 2.0 and Harvard Graphics for DOS does everything I need.... I can even use Archie and FTP to transfer the documents to my Windows 95 desktop. I also write my own software with VB 1.0 for DOS and Borland C++ without the bloatware of Xcode.

 

[pdjudd]

You can run Leopard / Snow Leopard server and desktop / server from Lion onwards

I know that. My post and his however was dealing explicitly with the client OS of 10.6 which has never been supported not allowed. Snow Leopard server has a completely different EULA and is a different product (even though the underpinnings are the same) from Apple's perspective. I never brought it up since I don't recommend it unless you are asking about server OS's specifically.

If it supports the 32-Bit and 64-Bit server versions of Leopard and Snow Leopard, then it supports also the Client versions of 10.4.x*, 10.5.x, 10.6.x, 10.7.x and 10.8.x.

*it is not possible to install 10.4.x (the Intel version) inside a VM, if you do not have an existing 10.5.x or higher VM. You can install 10.4.x inside the 10.5.x (or higher) VM on a separate virtual disk.

All non server OSX released below Lion are not permitted on either of the major products and Apple's EULA does not provide the legal provisions to allow for this either (which is why neither VM ware nor Parallels allows you to do this).

 

[dazed]

I got 4 as part of a Macbundle. I'll just wait for 5 to be avail the same way.

 

[shurcooL]

I'm not sure how sustainable a business model it is for VMWare and Parallels to release minor updates for $49 every year. It would be nice if Fusion 5 and Parallels 8 were instead released as "4.2" and "7.1" at no charge for existing Fusion 4.1 and Parallels 7 owners. Upgrading an OS every year is one thing if it is going to be $20, but $49 is a bit much.

Yeah. I'm not going to pay $50 today knowing it'll be out of date and unsupported in just a year.

 

[rboerdijk]

I'm not sure how sustainable a business model it is for VMWare and Parallels to release minor updates for $49 every year. It would be nice if Fusion 5 and Parallels 8 were instead released as "4.2" and "7.1" at no charge for existing Fusion 4.1 and Parallels 7 owners. Upgrading an OS every year is one thing if it is going to be $20, but $49 is a bit much.

I have to agree - bought fusion3 march 2011, got v4 sep 2011...
and now version 5... For 49$ - forget it, not again.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Stupid question, but what does that mean?

Useful if you have a 3G/4G-modem or WLAN-device inside the VM. This should give your Mac an internet connection, if your VM has an internet connection. Previous versions required some additional work. In the past i used this
http://communities.vmware.com/message/1108638
with Ubuntu, Windows and Mac OS X VMs.

Some Ralink (WLAN) drivers cause problems within Mac OS X (kernel panics), so i installed the Ralink USB WLAN drivers within a 10.5.x VM, which means i still see the kernel panics from time to time, but only within the VM, not on my main machine.

 

[binarybob]

Does MWare Fusion 5 allow to virtualize Mac OS X 10.6.8 (Snow leopard) to run rosetta applications like Eudora, Canvas or Palm Desktop? VMware Fusion 4.1.0 allowed that.

I think it will if you use Snow Leopard Server. I am using it to run Imposition Publisher on a system running Lion. The app behaves just as it did running before the upgrade to lion running fusion 4. If like me you leave everything open you need lots of ram.

 

[ValSalva]

I'm upgrading for the better battery life. I have to use IE9 at work for some crappy web app built with the abominable ASP.NET.

Less of a hit on the battery would be very welcome.

 

[arkmannj]

interesting.
My Windows 7 Pro x64 performance score went from 4.9 (Fusion 4) to 4.7 (Fusion 5)

 

[Glenny2lappies]

The reason I hate Parallels is the cost of the constant upgrades.

Now VMWare are pulling the same stunt. Great, bend me over and milk me... moo moo.

Seems like there's little reason to upgrade apart from the satisfaction of paying money to VMWare.

meh.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

All non server OSX released below Lion are not permitted on either of the major products and Apple's EULA does not provide the legal provisions to allow for this either (which is why neither VM ware nor Parallels allows you to do this).

So i should buy separate (old) Macs, if i want to test my software on <= 10.5.x? *lol*

Regarding 10.4.x and higher client version VMs: Google is your friend.

 

[jhwalker]

For anyone that's used this before, how well does it run? I always wondered if you ran something like this all the programs would run a lot slower than they would on an actual PC machine.

I use the free VirtualBox, and it runs like a dream. Windows 8 boots in about 30 seconds, applications launch virtually instantaneously . . . haven't noticed any performance issues at all. Certainly runs a lot faster than the same programs on my 3-year-old work laptop.

 

[LagunaSol]

What's Windows Vista?

The old Windows 8.

Speaking of Windows 8, I wish they'd make those app tiles larger. I can barely see them.

 

[jhwalker]

The reason I hate Parallels is the cost of the constant upgrades.

Now VMWare are pulling the same stunt. Great, bend me over and milk me... moo moo.

Seems like there's little reason to upgrade apart from the satisfaction of paying money to VMWare.

meh.

What advantages do VMWare or Parallels have over free solutions, like VirtualBox? I've been using VirtualBox for a couple of years - it works well and does everything I need (e.g., Windows in a VM).

 

[RightMACatU]

Yeah... I bought on July 27, 2 days after the free upgrade window.

 

[pdjudd]

So i should buy separate (old) Macs, if i want to test my software on <= 10.5.x? *lol*

Regarding 10.4.x and higher client version VMs: Google is your friend.

Yes, if you want to keep things legal.

 

[lostngone]

VM what a scam!

It seems every time I turn around these companies(VMware, parallels) are releasing an "upgrade".

I know everyone has to make money but come on. How much "faster" can you make your software?

 

[Marx55]

No, that has never been allowed due to Apple's EULA. None of the vitualizing products will ever allow that unless Apple allows for it.

EDIT: what you were talking about was never endorsed by vmware and was never an advertised feature - it was a bug.

Yes, I know, but it seems to support it according to:

VMware Compatibility Guide
http://partnerweb.vmware.com/comp_guide2/search.php?deviceCategory=software&testConfig=16

 

[anthony11]

VMWare has been reasonable with their upgrades so far, so cannot hate them as much. Also, their bundle was in March, so people at least got a few months out of the latest version.

VMWare used to have reasonably-frequent promotions on Fusion, but that was at a time when the thing nominally cost $79 or whatever it was. Seems like perhaps they've gone toward a one low price all the time approach lately. I'm irked that there's no discounted upgrade from 4.x, but $50 probably isn't worth getting worked up about, especially since I can just expense it anyway. It's The Principle Of The Thing.

Buying these virtualization softwares is almost becoming like buying Macs. You need to buy them as soon as they come out, so that you don't get buyers remorse if the latest version if it comes out soon after your purchase .

It's slowed down considerably, but there was a time when it seemed as though Fusion and ||s released a new build weekly to leapfrog each other.

Wrt Fusion vs ||s vs VirtualBox: Fusion works pretty well for me, working around design flaws in Sun's and HP's service processors. Switching to something else would cost more of my time than paying the occasional upgrade fee.

 

[ralphdaily]

To me, win 7 on Mountain Lion is much faster with Fusion 5 than 4. Very happy.