If you are using OS X with a US keyboard layout, only want to use Parallels for Windows XP and are not planning on connecting external devices to the virtual machine, then Parallels (release version) is pretty reliable.morespce54 said:
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.
VMWare On Mac OSX Coming?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Blah Blah Blah..
If you cant use these virtualization programs to play the high graphic intensive games, then forget it.
Sure I see the benefits to be able to run multiply OS all at the same time.
But I'll stick to boot camp and go play Oblivion on my 17" Macbook Pro then...
If you cant use these virtualization programs to play the high graphic intensive games, then forget it.
Sure I see the benefits to be able to run multiply OS all at the same time.
But I'll stick to boot camp and go play Oblivion on my 17" Macbook Pro then...
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
Beta of Version 4
It's not a beta of a new product, it's a beta of a proven product (GSX V3) incorporating features of another proven product (VMware Workstation V5.5).
Not to knock the product, but in no way is it a new start.
Note that "VMware Server" is really "VMware GSX Server V4" - the name was changed.IscariotJ said:
It's not a beta of a new product, it's a beta of a proven product (GSX V3) incorporating features of another proven product (VMware Workstation V5.5).
Not to knock the product, but in no way is it a new start.
witness said:
I couldn't agree more. I also pay for Parallels because there are no other options. Snapshots and branching are such a huge feature for me as a web developer. I can have one VM running XP and have different branches for every version of IE supported. Same for Opera, firefox and other browsers. When trying to track down bugs that only effect certain installations this is a wonderful feature. There are a bunch of other reasons why snapshots and branching are very powerful features.
"My guess is that VMWare's tech has been licensed by Apple for inclusion into Leopard. "
That would be great if true, however with Intel based XServes to be released shortly, VMWare Server would open the door to traditional Wintel server sites (like mine). VMware plus a low end SAN is something I am looking at to reduce the glut of machines I have in my comms rooms. 2 or 3 Intel Xserves + an XServe Raid or two with VMWare would cover most of our current and future needs.
That would be great if true, however with Intel based XServes to be released shortly, VMWare Server would open the door to traditional Wintel server sites (like mine). VMware plus a low end SAN is something I am looking at to reduce the glut of machines I have in my comms rooms. 2 or 3 Intel Xserves + an XServe Raid or two with VMWare would cover most of our current and future needs.
Macrumors said:
I think I know when the forthcoming announcement will happen: VMware will be included in the next version of Mac OS. We will learn this in August.
I use VMware daily. It's great. If you have enough RAM and a strong enough CPU you can keep multiple virtual machines running full time. Each runs as fast as a "real" PC. I keep multiple versions of Linux and Solaris inside virual machines. I need this for testing to see that my software runs on these platforms. It is very fast on my duel Xeon box. I expect it would be fast on a Woodcrest powered Power Mac (mac pro?) and run acceptably fast on a Core Dual Mini. if you load in 2GB RAM.
p.s. I do currently run Parallels on my MacBook Pro. I actually find the XP vm I run as a test machine (configured with all our corporate software) runs as smooth as one of our Dell laptops. In fact I now leave my Dell in it's docking station at work, and use the Parallels VM to VPN in when I work from home.
thogs_cave
macrumors regular
foniks2020 said:
I also have my final release copy (also paid for), and overall the experience is good. I have had some problems with networking (virtual machines don't want to pick up my DHCP server at work), b ut it's pretty impressive. I have WinXP Pro and RedHat ES running alongside OS X, and it gives me the ability to analyze OS_specific issues for my users w/o a good deal of effort.
Yes, there are limitations (more with linux than windoze), but they are small. Parallels Desktop is worth every penny.
bhirt said:
Not quite true. QEMU is free, Open Source and does a few things Parallels can't do. For example QEMU will run a a PPC host and emulate an X86 or it can run on an X86 host and emulate a PPC. And of course can handle the X86 or an X86 case like Parallels. Other plataforms like SPARC and ARM or there too but not all combinations work yet. People have used QEMU to boot PPC Mac OS on an X86 PC but again these odd cases are not well suported but the X86 of X86 is well tested.
QEMU will run VMware images and Microsoft virtual pc images and some others even on a PPC or SPARC
kalisphoenix
macrumors 65816
I'm running Gentoo on Parallels and it's rock-solid. So far, Linux seems to be the best OS to run a Wiki on, and since I do all my work on a Wiki, I need Linux. However, my household currently has only one computer, and OS X is my general-purpose OS....
Either way, I haven't had any problems with Parallels. I used VMWare extensively on my PCs, and I liked it too. I didn't really use snapshots or anything like that. I thought they were lame. Just do backups the old-fashioned way -- by copying a file. Need backups more often? Hello, cron.
The nice thing is that I have a shrinking/expanding disk image reserved for my work (aside from the fixed-size disk holding the OS), so I can back the two up independently. It's pretty pimp.
Either way, I haven't had any problems with Parallels. I used VMWare extensively on my PCs, and I liked it too. I didn't really use snapshots or anything like that. I thought they were lame. Just do backups the old-fashioned way -- by copying a file. Need backups more often? Hello, cron.
The nice thing is that I have a shrinking/expanding disk image reserved for my work (aside from the fixed-size disk holding the OS), so I can back the two up independently. It's pretty pimp.
VMWare for OS X is a very good thing indeed. It seems that VMWare actually works properly with USB 1.1 devices. Parallels should be ashamed of themselves for pushing a final release out the door without proper USB support. Now if only we could get support for USB 2.0 devices too....
morespce54
macrumors 65816
Macrumors said:
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.
This is very good, but why ?
Once in a time, some years ago, I did some beta-testing for Connectix Virtual PC. It was born on a Mac platform and did some cool stuff like learning another Processor-architecture. Yes, bringing the same product out on an Intel-Based Platform. So the people behind connectix had the same capabilities what Apple Corp. can do with it's operating system. Boxing the mac-os out on different Microprocessor Architectures. What I see, there's no company more that can port an Operating System over on a different Microprocessor Architecture anymore. Just Apple. OK, Parallels make's the product available for another OS, but the same Intel Architecture. The same with VMWare, now they're porting cause OS X runs on an Intel Architecture.
In fact, it's poor manufacturing. I thought Microsoft did it once, porting Windows (server) over on another Processor Architecture. But they've dropped the product. And, what are the goals (a time ago) by buying over Connectix ? To get some foot in the door of Apple, or promote M$ Virtual Machine instead of porting Word over to OS X native (on PPC), you can buy a Windows License ? To Shake Apple Corp. with the words: And what if you users get no Word anymore ?
But see the facts, M$ is loosing grip on everything they've porting to another processor architecture and OS. Like a BIG Elephant that moves slowly, little mice makes better products. In fact Apple Corp. is at the moment a BIG winner, as a little mice in the BIG and slowly M$, IBM blues and Sun micro systems industry. (I think you will remember Project Looking Glass - And look at Apple's OS X Dashboard, Frontrow ....)
In the last run, the better OS (like OS X) will virtualize the simple standards like Windosez etc .... I think VM Ware knows that, and step by step it's doing its plans: Server virtualizations on (L)unix user friendly systems like MAC OS X.
Microsoft Windows is dead, it's an OLD architecture ... It's a wheel re-invented with wistle and bells ... But it rolls anymore
Peter
Gasu E.
macrumors 603
VMWare is the gold standard in this space, it is industrial-strength, it has a dominant market share, and it has a huge IT player behind it (EMC). It's not aimed at game-players. But for those who think Apple should be making a play for the Enterprise space (and BTW, I'm not one of them), this would be a significant win.
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.p...virtual_machine_geared_for_consumer_desktops/
Anybody read this? Looks like transparent support of Windows apps through a VM implimentation presented through a "unified desktop interface." Sounds to me like double click an .exe file and away you go.
Presumably you'd still have to pay for/install Windows for the VM to have an OS to host, but, wow, this patent seems to describe a computer on which [literally] everything JUST WORKS. (.exe, .app, etc.)
Anybody read this? Looks like transparent support of Windows apps through a VM implimentation presented through a "unified desktop interface." Sounds to me like double click an .exe file and away you go.
Presumably you'd still have to pay for/install Windows for the VM to have an OS to host, but, wow, this patent seems to describe a computer on which [literally] everything JUST WORKS. (.exe, .app, etc.)
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
Don't check any facts, because you'll find out that Microsoft Windows (the NT-based version) has been released, sold and supported on:Boony said:
- MIPS R-series RISC processors
- Digital's Alpha Processors
- Motorola/IBM PowerPC processors
- Intel IA64 processors (Itanium)
- Intel/AMD 32-bit x86 processors (386/486/...)
- Intel/AMD x64 processors (EM64T/AMD64)
Only Apple? What about Digital/Compaq/HP's OpenVMS system? (VAX, Alpha, Itanium). HP/UX? SunOS/Solaris?
Also, don't forget that OSX is based on NextStep and one of the BSD variants - both of which ran on x86 since before Next bought Apple. Apple's "genius" was in simply not breaking the existing multi-architecture port - they didn't suddenly do something fantastic last summer.
It's not magic, and it doesn't indicate that Apple is the brightest bulb in the pack - Apple's following in the footsteps of everyone else...
Yes it's old (NT was first released 12 years ago), but UNIX might very well be older than your parents.Boony said:
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
VMware runs dual-CPU 64-bit guests
VMware also supports running 64-bit VM operating systems (Windows XP 64-bit, Linux 64-bit, ...) even if it's running on a 32-bit host. (The host must be an x64-capable CPU - so that doesn't help Apple users until next week when Woodies show up.)
VMware supports multi-CPU virtual machines, so that your VM can use both of the CPUs in your dual-core system.Core Trio said:
VMware also supports running 64-bit VM operating systems (Windows XP 64-bit, Linux 64-bit, ...) even if it's running on a 32-bit host. (The host must be an x64-capable CPU - so that doesn't help Apple users until next week when Woodies show up.)
A slightly different perspective?
It'll be interesting to see what develops from this. While it is encouraging, I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with a reliable way to first get the intel-MacOSX to run under VMWare on the PC. (Nothing against the fine efforts going on at the OSx86 project by the way).
Don't get me wrong - I love the Mac as much as anyone else out there.
But realistically their development time/cost efforts would be much less going this route first, especially as they could leverage the various VMWare versions they already have built. It could also buy them some time for getting a native Mac version polished up and released.
Just a thought.
It'll be interesting to see what develops from this. While it is encouraging, I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with a reliable way to first get the intel-MacOSX to run under VMWare on the PC. (Nothing against the fine efforts going on at the OSx86 project by the way).
Don't get me wrong - I love the Mac as much as anyone else out there.
But realistically their development time/cost efforts would be much less going this route first, especially as they could leverage the various VMWare versions they already have built. It could also buy them some time for getting a native Mac version polished up and released.
Just a thought.
Boony said:
Um, Linux? Not only does it run on about zillion architectures, the latest version of the kernel added support for Sun's Niagara-processors. So it's still being ported to different architectures as we speak. It's just that there has been no major new releases of CPU-architectures. But when there is, Linux is usually the first OS to support the new arch. Linux was first to support x86-64 for example. Solaris ran first on Niagara (naturally), but Linux was the second OS to run on it (IIRC).
NetBSD is also very good at this porting-stuff, but it seems that Linux is overtaking it.
ezekielrage_99
macrumors 68040
Kind of interesting but it begs the question why now after the release of Boot Camp, I can see many people will be interested but if you can easily run Windows XP next the Mac OSX with little problems why bother with VMWare.
With that said I'd prefer VMWare instead of running Windows XP 😉
With that said I'd prefer VMWare instead of running Windows XP 😉
jayducharme
macrumors 601
GuestPC
You're all mentioning many of the virtual PC products out there except one: has anyone tried GuestPC? (It's at > http://www.lismoresystems.com <)
I've been using it for a while and I'm really impressed. I mainly wanted to run Rollercoaster Tycoon without having to keep a separate PC in the house. I tried iEmulator, and it was terrible. So I was hesitant to plunk down $40 for GuestPC, but I'm glad I did. On my dual 1.8 PowerMac G5 with 3.5gb RAM, Rollercoaster Tycoon runs as well as it did on my PC. On my iMac G5 with 1gb RAM, it runs okay but is a bit sluggish with larger parks. Still, pretty impressive for a virtual PC.
The company keeps actively working on the software; I get update notices every couple of months, and the speed keeps improving. I also like the fact that I can install any version of Windows that I want (I prefer 98). My only gripe is that so far the virtual video card is pretty crappy, with only 64k color support. But I can live with that, since most of the games I want to play had pretty crappy graphics.
You're all mentioning many of the virtual PC products out there except one: has anyone tried GuestPC? (It's at > http://www.lismoresystems.com <)
I've been using it for a while and I'm really impressed. I mainly wanted to run Rollercoaster Tycoon without having to keep a separate PC in the house. I tried iEmulator, and it was terrible. So I was hesitant to plunk down $40 for GuestPC, but I'm glad I did. On my dual 1.8 PowerMac G5 with 3.5gb RAM, Rollercoaster Tycoon runs as well as it did on my PC. On my iMac G5 with 1gb RAM, it runs okay but is a bit sluggish with larger parks. Still, pretty impressive for a virtual PC.
The company keeps actively working on the software; I get update notices every couple of months, and the speed keeps improving. I also like the fact that I can install any version of Windows that I want (I prefer 98). My only gripe is that so far the virtual video card is pretty crappy, with only 64k color support. But I can live with that, since most of the games I want to play had pretty crappy graphics.
jayducharme
macrumors 601
BTW, has anyone heard of MS viruses corrupting the new Intel Macs if Windows is booted into? It would be a real problem if a virus prevented re-booting the machine. I've heard that virtualization software contains any viruses to the data file (which can easily be deleted), so any threat is greatly reduced.
Too little , too late for VMWare. Their arrogant behavior will haunt them. A couple of large manufacturers have already abandoned more or less VMWare. Most of them opt for Xen (Open Source) or HW virtualisation (now that's the way to go).
For me, I got Parallels (official release) running on my Macbook Pro. I build images with Suse, RH, Solaris, MS-DOS (yep, still use a very old accounting program for consulting previous fiscal years) and Windows.
I haven't had a single crash, freeze (exept when shutting down SUSE) or malfunction. If only my Macbook could accomodate 4GB of RAM (or more)😀 😀
For me, I got Parallels (official release) running on my Macbook Pro. I build images with Suse, RH, Solaris, MS-DOS (yep, still use a very old accounting program for consulting previous fiscal years) and Windows.
I haven't had a single crash, freeze (exept when shutting down SUSE) or malfunction. If only my Macbook could accomodate 4GB of RAM (or more)😀 😀