VMWare Fusion Beta 3 out

slboettcher · Apr 6, 2007

Vpn...

I am able to use a Nortel VPN connection on the Mac side and use it in Windows in Fusion.
That alone is a killer element for me. One connection, both sides using the tunnel without any screwing around.

I've had a couple odd freezes with shared folders, and performance isn't up to Parallels, but this is going to give me an option, and I hope the Parallels guys can step up here.

Haven't tried anything 3D yet, but will just for kicks.

I think networking is very important, and ease-of-use more so.

clbell · Apr 6, 2007

I installed it and used it with my Boot Camp partition of XP. I like it so far. It's faster and uses less memory. However, I can't use VirtueDesktop with it so it's a no-go unless they add some kind of way to pass key combinations to OSX so virtue can do its switching.

dkp · Apr 6, 2007

clbell said:
I installed it and used it with my Boot Camp partition of XP. I like it so far. It's faster and uses less memory. However, I can't use VirtueDesktop with it so it's a no-go unless they add some kind of way to pass key combinations to OSX so virtue can do its switching.

I use and prefer Desktop Manager over VirtueDesktop, and it works fine with Parallels and Fusion. The universal version is here: http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/12682

dhjdhj · Apr 6, 2007

While I understand all the arguments for why a Windows user might want/need access to Linux, why is this the case for Mac users? After all, you've got a rock solid BSD Unix underneath already (complete with X11 server) and as far as I know, pretty much anything available for Linux boxes can be made to work under BSD?

D

mike3k said:
Unless Parallels improves their Linux support, I'm switching to VMware. The latest Ubuntu beta won't even boot in Parallels but I had no trouble installing it in VMware. They even have VMware tools for Linux, so the VM window doesn't capture the mouse like Parallels does when running Linux.

The only advantage Parallels has is Coherence mode for Windows, but I could live without it if I can run Linux as nicely as I run Windows.

VTMac · Apr 6, 2007

In my case, it's because the software product I develop runs on linux. So while I do most of my development on OSX, ultimately it is deployed on Linux and this is where I must test/validate. Also some really important applications -- like Oracle -- don't have (or have very limited) versions that run on OSX. While I would advocate running Oracle in production on any VM, it's great for doing demo's, testing, development and such.

dkp · Apr 6, 2007

dhjdhj said:
While I understand all the arguments for why a Windows user might want/need access to Linux, why is this the case for Mac users? After all, you've got a rock solid BSD Unix underneath already (complete with X11 server) and as far as I know, pretty much anything available for Linux boxes can be made to work under BSD?

D

The company I work for is ripping out Sun and Windows servers and replacing them (where possible) with IBM blade servers running Linux. I need to support Linux - that simple. And I hate Linux. I also need to support Apple XServers, and for a while at least, Solaris.

austin · Apr 7, 2007

VTMac said:
I seriously doubt 3D acceleration will have any significant impact on the ultimate winner. The VAST, VAST, VAST majority (as in more than 90%) of business applications have no need whatsoever of 3D support. And ultimately, it's the mainstream part of the market that will determine the winner. Don't confuse people on message boards willing to try out new beta VM features like 3D with the rest of the real world. The rest of the people out their want something that is brain dead simple to use and is rock solid. That's who will be the winner.

Many of the programs people are needing Parallels or VMWare for are dependent on user input (which can be slow or fast depending on the user), or do not care about 3D acceleration.

The programs that need true 3D acceleration - one would be better off with Boot Camp, or even a $$00 PC.

nicka · Apr 7, 2007

Boot Camp Partition and Vista?

Okay, since Fusion Beta 3 now allows using boot camp partition like parallels, can anyone with Vista installed on Boot Camp confirm if Fusion works with it, or is that feature limited to XP like parallels?

Nick

pducharme · Apr 7, 2007

Bootcamp Vista Partition Support under Fusion B3

Hi,

I tried my Vista Bootcamp partition (with latest Bootcamp 1.2) in Fusion and It work.

Didnt installed VM tools, but can confirm it is booting to the desktop.

DJ-GROBE · Apr 7, 2007

I test, and my aplication MonoToucLive, (ww.monotouchlive.com) just not work.
Under parallels work perfect.

I see vmware make lower usage of cpu comapred with paralleles,.........anyway, i detect slow, work of all winfdows, Vmware need a lot of work , and i think if paralleles focuse more, in the functionalitly and no in things like COHERENCE, vmware never can reach the quality of paralleles.

websyndicate · Apr 7, 2007

VMware has just begun in the game as for parallels has been around for a while yea they could do better if they could not worry about COHERENCE so much it would be great. More performacnce less eye candy

palter · Apr 7, 2007

mike3k said:
Unless Parallels improves their Linux support, I'm switching to VMware. The latest Ubuntu beta won't even boot in Parallels but I had no trouble installing it in VMware. They even have VMware tools for Linux, so the VM window doesn't capture the mouse like Parallels does when running Linux.

The only advantage Parallels has is Coherence mode for Windows, but I could live without it if I can run Linux as nicely as I run Windows.

Which kernel version is Ubuntu?

I'm having no luck getting VMWare Tools for Linux working on Fedora Core with a 2.6.20 kernel.

Piggy · Apr 8, 2007

dkp said:
There's a Fusion forum at VMWare to discuss specific Fusion features and performance.

Would you mind providing the link? I can't seem to find it on their community forum page. Also any info about being able to run or convert Parallels VMs to use in Fusion as I'd like to try it out. Thanks.

drval · Apr 8, 2007

websyndicate said:
VMware has just begun in the game as for parallels has been around for a while yea they could do better if they could not worry about COHERENCE so much it would be great. More performacnce less eye candy

For some of us Coherence is not "eye candy" but it is essential functionality.

How would you feel if some of us called your favorite functions/abilities something like "function candy"?

solgae · Apr 8, 2007

The thing that VMware wins over Parallels for me is that DAEMON Tools works great under VMware. Parallels throws an SCSI error. Also, host power status can be brought over to guest OS, so if you're running on battery power, the guest OS will be on battery power profile as well, saving you some precious battery time. And it might just be me, but VMware seems to have better USB 2.0 support. Experimental 3D support is also a plus - not the best, but it's there if you need it.

Parallels wins on Coherence support, though I'm willing to live without it. Also, I don't know about you, but Parallels just feels a tiny bit more snappier. This is when I compare VMware w/o the debug mode and Parallels.

n9yty · Apr 8, 2007

This is because Fusion is able to provide this great performance (for me it is quite acceptable!) WITHOUT having to stall at startup while creating a HUGE .mem file on your hard drive. On my machine, with 2GB of RAM, Paralells insists on creating a 1.5GB .mem file when I start it up. A horrible waste of time and disk space just to get the VM running, and Fusion doesn't require it. Let the people rejoice!

n9yty · Apr 8, 2007

It's a pain, but if you go up to the menu bar so it drops down, then click on it, you can then switch away using VirtueDesktops. Just FYI.

tim-e · Apr 8, 2007

websyndicate said:
VMware has just begun in the game as for parallels has been around for a while yea they could do better if they could not worry about COHERENCE so much it would be great. More performacnce less eye candy

I use Coherence functionality almost daily. There's nothing more annoying than having all of Windows XP up on my desktop just to use SANtricity.

websyndicate · Apr 8, 2007

drval said:
For some of us Coherence is not "eye candy" but it is essential functionality.

How would you feel if some of us called your favorite functions/abilities something like "function candy"?

my favorite function is full screen

websyndicate · Apr 8, 2007

I have switched to vmware for now I still have my back up from my parallels images as always but as for the final switch we will see at the end who know. I havent decided yet....as for everybody who wants more linux functionality what is it that you want?