VMWare On Mac OSX Coming?

[MacRumors]

With the recent release of the final version of Parallels Desktop for Mac OS X (Intel), some are wondering where market-leader VMWare is in developing a virtualization solution for OS X, if at all. While previous comments by VMWare CEO Diane Greene had stated that their product was running on Macs in their labs, little has been indicated about a release timetable, or if the company was going to release the solution at all.

Virtualization.info recently interviewed Raghu Raghuram, Vice President of Platform Products at VMware. While not offering a ton of new information, he did indicate that announcements were forthcoming.

With Apple switching to x86-based processors, robust and proven virtualization capabilities for Apple users is an interesting opportunity. We have stated that we do have VMware running on Mac OS X in our labs - stay tuned for future announcements in this area.

 

[Arcus]

This would be ultra sweet.

 

[Core Trio]

Now I dont have an intel mac, and ive never even seen parallels in action, but the general concensus seems to be that it is a great piece of software. Aside from a lack of high end graphics support, is there anything that VMware could possibly improve on what parallels has already done? Or are we just going to have many versions of the same software from Parallels, VMware, and Microsoft (VirtualPC)

 

[jephrey]

I say, the more options the better. If VPC makes software too, that'd be great. I don't know if there are any limitations or small quirks when using parallels software, and if there will be any with VMWare or VPC, but it's quite possible that each will offer something slightly different. Plus, the competition can only do good things. Right now, my only real option is VPC, and although I'm happy with it, it'd sure be nice if a bunch of other softwares were around to push the importance of perfecting it.

Anyhow, my opinion is that apple should either buy one of these companies, or work on their own virtualization software. It's debateable for sure, but my hunch says that boot camp and a piece of virtualization software could really help the push to get people to switch.

Jephrey

 

[kainjow]

A little late in the game, I'd say. The only thing VMware can do is offer a cheaper alternative to Parallels, and the ability to use existing VMware machines from Linux/Windows on your Mac without having to recreate them (which wouldn't be that many users).

 

[g4pismo]

One ring to rule them all...

One of the benefits of VMware, if they port to OSX, is they will have all the major OS's covered. I use a Mac,Windows and Linux systems at work. I find that I often move my VM's around quite a bit. I can share Virt.PC VM's with my Windows box and Mac, but I can’t share them with my Linux box. Same problem with VMWare today, I can share between my Linux box and Windows, but not with the Mac. This would allow me to use one platform.

[kainjow beat me to it]

 

[bigandy]

A little late in the game, I'd say. The only thing VMware can do is offer a cheaper alternative to Parallels, and the ability to use existing VMware machines from Linux/Windows on your Mac without having to recreate them (which wouldn't be that many users).

hahaha. cheaper than parallels??

 

[dicklacara]

The more. the merrier...

This is good news.

Also, there is at least one other solution on the horizon: Q at

http://www.kberg.ch/q/

Q is not as refined as Parallels (alpha), but it is pretty good and has some nice features:

1) you can run the Vista Beta 2 on Q

2) Q will run on PPC or intel Macs

3) Q can import VPC virtual machines

4) Q has multiple, pre-installed OSes available for download

I have run many windows emulators over the years (SoftWindows, Virtual PC, etc.) and the current offerings (especially on a MacTel) are great.

I have never owned a PC, and never will... but there are some Win apps that I must run.

I try to support them all (purchase or donation) because you can never have too many options...

My current favorite is running Parallels with a Win real-time Stock Market app while running a TV Market show streamed from the family room with CyTV (OS X only). With virtue Desktop I immediately switch between full-screen Stock Info & full-screen TV... really neat

Dick

 

[ebow]

A little late in the game, I'd say. The only thing VMware can do is offer a cheaper alternative to Parallels, and the ability to use existing VMware machines from Linux/Windows on your Mac without having to recreate them (which wouldn't be that many users).

The could be innovative and find a way to use the Windows partition from Bootcamp as the hard drive within VMWare, as an option. That would allow those who want it to have only one Windows setup, accessible through both a virtualization product (within OS X) and standalone with full access to hardware. There are probably way more potential snags or roadblocks to this than I can imagine, but there may be room for differentiation.

 

[balamw]

hahaha. cheaper than parallels??

They offer a free version for Windows/Linux.

The other thing that they offer is Enterprise credibility... Not knocking Parallels, but VMWare has been at this for a while and has street cred.

Personally, I still want Crossover Office!

B

 

[IscariotJ]

It's doubtful if VMware's offering will be a cheaper alternative to Parallels, considering that VM Workstation is currently about $180, I think ( I'm discounting VMware Player, as it doesn't allow the creation of VM's, and Parallels don't have an equivalent product to the free VMware Server ).

Feature-wise, there isn't much between them ( VMware supports ACPI, for example ). As has been pointed out, the main benefit to VMware, is the ability to move the VM's between machines/OS's. I haven't tried, but I don't think it's possible to move a VM from OSX to Win32/Linux with Parallels.

I'd be happy to see VMware come out with a Mac offering ( and soon ). The more options, the better off we are. I can see the only loser here being Microsoft. VMware already have a reputation for credible VM software, and Parallels have the distinction of being the first to market. The lack of info on VPC for Intel Macs ( apart from a mention saying they were talking with Apple to see if it is feasible, see here, http://www.microsoft.com/mac/default.aspx?pid=macIntelQA ) makes me wonder if MS are wondering if it's worth the bother.

Be interesting to see if Apple make a move on Parallels, in the long run. I think that VMware will be a little too large for Apple to swallow.

 

[aristobrat]

Aside from a lack of high end graphics support, is there anything that VMware could possibly improve on what parallels has already done?

We use VMWare at work for a bunch of servers. It would be cool to be able to move a copy of the Virtual Machine from a server to my MacBook if I want to dink around with it.

 

[IscariotJ]

They offer a free version for Windows/Linux.

To be fair to Parallels, they aren't comparable products, though. Parallel Workstation/Desktop is the equivalent of VMware Workstation ( which isn't as cheap as Parallels ). If/when VMware release Server on OSX, I think it will be overkill for the majority of people who run VM's on their iMac/MB/MBP ( as must VMware, why else have Workstation and Server? ).

Having tried VMware Server, I must admit, I was very impressed, even taking into account that it's in beta ( though very near to release ).

 

[John Jacob]

The could be innovative and find a way to use the Windows partition from Bootcamp as the hard drive within VMWare, as an option. That would allow those who want it to have only one Windows setup, accessible through both a virtualization product (within OS X) and standalone with full access to hardware.

That would be the killer feature for me. Boot into Windows natively from BootCamp for 3D games, use the VM for all other Windows apps. Once that is possible, I'll trade in my PowerBook for an Intel Mac stat.

 

[bretm]

That would be the killer feature for me. Boot into Windows natively from BootCamp for 3D games, use the VM for all other Windows apps. Once that is possible, I'll trade in my PowerBook for an Intel Mac stat.

But you can do that now with parralels for $39. So why do you need to wait for VMWare?

 

[ccunning]

That would be the killer feature for me. Boot into Windows natively from BootCamp for 3D games, use the VM for all other Windows apps. Once that is possible, I'll trade in my PowerBook for an Intel Mac stat.

This is a feature VMWare has always offered as far as I know. I can't imagine a Mac version would be any different.

But you can do that now with parralels for $39. So why do you need to wait for VMWare?

I was wondering if parallels could access a boot camp installation. I hadn't seen any confirmation of this anywhere before. Good to know.

 

[dicklacara]

I was wondering if parallels could access a boot camp installation. I hadn't seen any confirmation of this anywhere before. Good to know.

Not yet... they are looking into it!

 

[witness]

But you can do that now with parralels for $39. So why do you need to wait for VMWare?

Parallels is very similar to VMWare Player (the free edition), with the exception that it allows you to create a VM.

VMWare Workstation is a much more advanced product. It has the ability to branch and merge. You can even have teams working on the same virtual machine images. You can also take snapshots and rollback to any point. Also, apart from Windows, Parallels guest OS support is very poor (try running, FreeBSD 6 or Ubuntu 6.06 and you will see what I mean). Parallels is also very buggy, for example, it has major issues when run on non US computers.

I am a paying customer of Parallels, but only because there is no alternative. As a VMWare user of many years, I would be one of the first to pay for VMWare for OS X even if it costs 10 times more than Parallels it is worth every penny.

 

[rtao]

my Parallels desktop is going to expire in a couple of days, and I was about to pay for it..... now I think I am going to hold back for a while.... since we are using VMWare in the office, which make so much easier for me if I could have vmware in my macbook pro rather then the a bit buggy Parallels....

 

[morespce54]

my Parallels desktop is going to expire in a couple of days, and I was about to pay for it..... now I think I am going to hold back for a while.... since we are using VMWare in the office, which make so much easier for me if I could have vmware in my macbook pro rather then the a bit buggy Parallels....

so even the final release of Parallels is still buggy ???

 

[aristobrat]

I think that how buggy Parallels is depends on what you do with it.

For normal day-to-day XP stuff, I've had zero issues with it. Trying to get my BlackBerry to work as a USB modem (something that works great in regular Windows XP) doesn't work currently in Parallels (the released version).

I also use another copy of Parallels to run a Linux web/email server on a Mac mini, and it's been up solid for over 60 days. (would be longer, but I had to reboot the Mini for a firmware update).

 

[kinesin]

We use VM throughout our company, and it's a great product. I'm currently running VMWare workstation on Debian, with windows clients.

For those saying you can't install using vmware player - yes you can. Just download the CD booting images, or modify the config file, 'google' it's real easy.

The ability to boot of a hard drive/parition or disk image makes VMware a great product, and it's dam useful as having DR images of all our servers available to boot if needed.
Off course the killer is that it should be able to use all the old images we already have - including rogue SCO openserver5 clients that were a right bitch to install.

 

[foniks2020]

Final release less buggy so far

so even the final release of Parallels is still buggy ???

I have a final release copy (yes, paid for ;-p ) and so far it is less buggy than the last RC. I haven't had a chance to fully test it out as yet but overall it seems to run more smoothly.

This is to be expected though as the final release should have debug code removed if nothing else... but no guarantee that there aren't still major bugs, just that my limited use hasn't triggered them.

 

[Object-X]

Early bird

Parallels just got my $50 so VMWare is taking too long. Early bird gets the worm I guess. Doesn't matter anyway, I believe that Apple is going to include some kind of virtualization in Leapord; so buying Parallels is a temporary measure. I do find it interesting that Apple seems to be pushing Parallels over it's own Bootcamp on their web site. Makes you wonder if they helped Parallels or if they may buy them. I guess I suspected that VMWare was waiting for Apple to show off Leapord next month before deciding to get into this market.

 

[Squareball]

I guess I suspected that VMWare was waiting for Apple to show off Leapord next month before deciding to get into this market.

My guess is that VMWare's tech has been licensed by Apple for inclusion into Leopard.

I find it highly unlikely that a big company like VMWare (Big name in virtualization for many years) looked at all the people just clamoring to run Windows inside side OSX and said "Let's wait and see".

Apple is also known for licensing and buying tech they want rather than rolling their own. They did it with iTunes for instance. Yes, they could have made their own codebase for iTunes had they wanted to, but why reinvent the wheel?