digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at blogs.vmware.com

VMware Fusion 2.0 Beta 1 Launches; 2.0 will be free upgrade.

blogs.vmware.com — VMware has announced a free public beta of VMware Fusion 2.0. The've also announced that VMware Fusion 2.0 will be a *free upgrade* for all VMware Fusion 1.x customers, when it launches. Features in 2.0 Beta 1: *True Multiple Display Support *DirectX 9.0 Shader Model 2 3D acceleration *More!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Zeddd, on 05/06/2008, -3/+21Dugg for the ridiculous 360 degree 8 monitor set-up. Haha! Any person who had that would be my god!
    • mrsteveman1, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4You don't ask much of your deity huh?

      Ok then, I did it, now go sacrifice something in my honor, your choice.
      • SonnyW, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3My choice? The possibilities...

        Fine then, I sacrifice my virginity in the name of my deity. All hail mrsteveman1!
    • mstrebe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Eight correctly supported monitors?
      (switching to mac)
      • Zeddd, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Well, let me know when you do, so then I can begin worshipping you!
  • diggman21, on 05/06/2008, -12/+2Sweet, where's OS X guest support?
    • bigandy, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5Probably in the bit after EFI emulation, and the EULA issues. Currently the EULA states only OS X Server can be virtualized on an OS X Server instance. e.g. You can't run Leopard Server on Leopard Client.
  • colincornaby, on 05/06/2008, -2/+27Well, this would seem to be the end for Parallels, considering that they don't even have XP SP3 support yet...
    • bigandy, on 05/06/2008, -0/+24VMWare is king in the virtualization market. Parallels was always going to take a big hit. Plus their interface is just too childish.
      • Hamletlere, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1Maybe in the server world, but I haven't found it to be so in the desktop world. I've tried both, and I keep going back to Parallels as the more flexible solution and easier to use interface. For example: I can have multiple (and branching) "restore" points for a virtual disk, as opposed to VMWare's single snapshot. I can attach a virtual network to a specific real interface, instead of being forced to let VMWare pick (incorrectly, often) the interface to use.

        Perhaps they've fixed some of the problems since I last used VMWare Fusion, but it wasn't satisfactory to me last time I attempted it (probably a month ago). I also found Linux support (specifically, the Xorg plugins) to be easier to use under Parallels, not requiring kernel drivers to be compiled, and working on a wide range of distributions in the virtual machine.

        I'd also like to know why you think Parallel's interface is childish? I use it daily at work, and haven't found it to be such at all.
        • schoate09, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Parallels' virtualization engine is so inferior to VMware's. VMware has greater 3d support, faster virtual disk support, faster CPU virtualization, etc. Even on VMware fusion, which is really one of their weakest products, it's still better than any non VMware solution I've ever used.
        • TheFinaleofSeem, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Screw Parallels. Since Leopard came out, they have NOT been able to make it reliable. It breaks so goddamned easily and sometimes refuses to work at all. VMWare has been flawless for me thus far. Parallels broke one too many times and required a complete uninstall/reinstall.
      • Katarn, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I really liked Parallel's original interface for OSX. They changed it for who knows why and now the buttons just don't look like they belong with the Mac OS or Windows.
    • Buu700, on 05/06/2008, -2/+4Well, Parallels on Mac. However, even on Linux I haven't heard anything good about Parallels.
    • matperk, on 05/06/2008, -6/+1MediaTemple webhost uses parallels' server applications in the thousands to run their servers.

      http://weblog.mediatemple.net/weblog/2008/02/12/pa ...
      • MtheoryX, on 05/06/2008, -1/+5Dead link.
      • popfrogs, on 05/06/2008, -0/+6Quoth the raven, 404.
      • clesch, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2They use Virtuozzo by the company formerly known as SWsoft which recently acquired Parallels and abandoned their old name.
        The developers of the Mac Parallels application have nothing at all to do with Virtuozzo, they just share the name now.
    • eleven, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3I took advantage of the competitive upgrade from Parallels to Fusion - they're both pretty good but I have a feeling that VMWare will pull ahead.
    • makis, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7i'm using parralles with XP SP3 and have no problems at all.and having used both a lot for work, parallels is much better when it comes to suspend and restore the VM even on a macbook pro with 2gb of ram, and only 512 mb of ram for the virtualized OS...vmware completely freeze the lapto for half a minute while resuming and take forever to become active, while parallels is up and ready to go in less than 30 seconds.said that, vmware is more stable, faster, and supports both cores of my C2D
    • vault, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3There is no comparison...I switched to VMWare Fusion and it's much more stable and much less gimmicky than Parallels.
  • MurphyMac, on 05/06/2008, -0/+20Fusion 1.x has exceeded all my expectations. Zero regrets about leaving Boot Camp behind. Using the VMWare Converter made the switch easy.
  • clesch, on 05/06/2008, -1/+5Has anyone tested the new DX 9.0 support?
    I wonder if HL2/TF2 would run in it as I can't be bothered to install Bootcamp just to play that single video game once a week.
    • Lambeco, on 05/06/2008, -2/+0I'm installing it just for this reason. I've got my fingers crossed.
      • omnivector, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2HL2/Portal does not yet work in 2.0 :(
    • superxero044, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4well with vmware fusion you can use the same partition for boot camp as virtual windows in vmware.

      so even with the current version you can just reboot to run tf2
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1I tried playing Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth. It at least loaded up to the menu, but in-game was just a white screen. Oh well, it's still a beta, so hopefully they get the kinks ironed out in the end.
  • alpha88, on 05/06/2008, -1/+6YESSSS! I've been waiting for multiple display support!
  • websyndicate, on 05/06/2008, -4/+8why the hell would you need 8 monitors in a VM? Okay now its a ***** contest between Parallels and Fusion
    • Asphyxia8489, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11It's not a case of "Why would you need it" it's a case of "cause we can"
    • paradexes, on 05/06/2008, -2/+2Why would you want to blend random stuff? http://www.willitblend.com/ I mean really the point is moot. And people can and do use multiple monitors for alot of things. Why not virtualize that as well? VMware's whole thing is to virtualize everything they can. This should be no different. But running 8 monitors is not for everyone, but I am sure someone will put that particular feature to good use somewhere.
    • p0tent1al, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2No ***** contest; VMware Fusion easily outshines Parallels. The only reason you would go with Parallels, is if you wanted a cheap alternative.
      • Raptor007, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Doesn't Parallels cost more?
      • Hamletlere, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1As I mentioned above, not for me. I use Parallels on a daily basis, but have tried VMWare Fusion off and on to see if I'd like to switch. Sadly, it still is not as flexible as Parallels for me. Until it is, I won't be switching. Parallels is definitely not the "cheap alternative" that doesn't hold a candle to Fusion, as you are making out.

        One of the reasons I was trying VMWare was because of the atrocious amount of virtual memory each Parallels session takes up (about 1.2G of virtual memory each, that's with 512MB virtual machines). I was hoping that Fusion would be much more efficient in its memory usage. Sadly, I didn't find this to be the case last time I tried, about a month ago. Perhaps 2.0 is better in this regard, however.
  • sthulbourn, on 05/06/2008, -9/+0Finally, I can use my mac to develop games for my 360
  • specialK16, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3Where is the 3D support for other versions of VMWare?
    • paradexes, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Probably coming later on. The support has been there, but needs to be added via the VMX file. it is documented in VMware's KB.
      • specialK16, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Yup, but it never worked for me :(.

        Maybe it is time to try again.
        • schoate09, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Depending on your Mac, it may not work. The 3d rendering backend is incompatible with all Macs running the Intel GMA950 chipset.
  • andrewtheart, on 05/06/2008, -21/+1NOBODY CARES
    • makis, on 05/06/2008, -1/+5apparently someone did...
    • andrewtheart, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Sorry about this comment, I was male PMS'ing when I posted it. It especially doesn't make sense in light of the fact that I used VMWare at one time and thought it was pretty decent. VirtualBox for me though.
  • bigandy, on 05/06/2008, -1/+5And it's not just eight monitors!
    "Use up to 10 displays with VMware Fusion"

    :-D
    • tapeworm77, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Yeah I hate it when I can only get 8/10 working.
  • atticus8, on 05/06/2008, -0/+6I can't get my Hackintosh to direct boot to Windows, and it's caused my PC gaming universe to collapse inward upon itself. Many tears were shed, for one can only live on the six or seven Mac-native-but-still-slightly-inferior PC ports for so long. If VMware can get fairly recent games to run (no need for Crysis, I'd be happy with original HL2 or F.E.A.R.) I will switch over to them in an instant, and this is speaking as a guy who paid full price for Parallels 2.0 and then paid again for 3.0.

    Of course, what I'd REALLY like to do is a get a freakin' straight boot right into the Windows XtraPirated that I have, but that turned out to be way harder than building the entire Hackintosh from scratch, and the difficulty of doing so is still vexing me. Or maybe I'm just stupid.
    • Appleologist, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1you're just stupid. jk but I also paid full for Parallels 2.0 and 3.0 - plan on taking advantage of that $30 rebate from VMware for Fusion soon.
    • Jpesci, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5Buy a separate HD and boot windows from that.
      • atticus8, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Thanks for this advice. I've heard of this, and I actually tried it. It makes TOTAL SENSE, and I can't think of a reason why it wouldn't work. Yet it didn't! I think it has something to do with how I set up the BIOS. I have the hacky hard drive on SATA1, master. The Windows one was on SATA2, slave. (It's an asus p5w dh board.) Try as I might, even switching the Windows drive to SATA1, it simply won't boot.
        Despite that it hasn't worked, this still seems like the best idea. I'll work on it some more after finals.
    • Raptor007, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1You're right about the sad state of Mac gaming. I miss the days when Mac ports came out better (Doom, WarCraft 2, etc).
      • atticus8, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I'd really like to see more improvements in WINE, particularly in the DirectX / pixel shader areas. Hopefully that might make the transfers much less painful and more plentiful. The majority of Mac users don't have Hackintoshes, however, and thus have the full complement of Boot Camp abilities available to them, so maybe the point is moot.
  • Mystreaux, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3i use vmware fusion on my macbook pro, mainly because fruity loops is windows only and i love playing around on it.
    however, even when i designate most of my memory to running windows in full screen mode with minimal mac applications open, it lags and sputters like crazy.
    could be fruity loops, but windows itself takes a substantial amount of time to load, every single time. sometimes my cursor just sits there frozen for 5 minutes.

    *sigh*
    • superxero044, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2you really need 3/4 gigs of ram to do this
    • makis, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3i *do* this with parallels everyday to develop windows things and .net apps with "only" 2gigs of ram, and it's true.vmware takes a HUUUUGE amount of time to load.parallels doesn't.
      • andrewtheart, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Try VirtualBox. I run Windows XP under it and dedicate 192MB RAM, and it runs decently fast (surprisingly) on my only slightly better than average laptop.
  • Laxaloot, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Is there going to be support for firewire drives now? And don't tell me i can set it up to be a shared folder, cause the "read-only" problem is a big one for me.
    • DomZy, on 05/06/2008, -1/+10Set it up as a shared folder
    • omnivector, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3No, there's no firewire support and there's likely never to be any. What's the business reason? iPods use USB2 now. Almost every external HD has a USB2 connection. And worst case, you can setup a read/write shared folder.
  • robzilla804, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Still no snapshot manager. Makes no sense for the Windows VMWare to have it but not Fusion. I read somewhere that the technology to support it was already in the code they just needed to turn it on. I couldn't care less about 10 monitor support and DirectX 9 acceleration. However, there is a real business need for snapshot management. Sigh.
  • harlowsmonkeys, on 05/06/2008, -2/+2I have VMWare Fusion, but rarely use it. I usually use Parallels, for the simple reason that Parallels has vastly superior snapshot handling. Parallels snapshot handling is like VMWare Workstation handling--you can have as many as you want, and you can have different branches. VMWare Fusion snapshot handling is like VMWare Server snapshot handling--you get one snapshot at a time. Take another, and it replaces that. It doesn't appear from their feature list that they have improved this in the beta. :-(
    • BRODEL, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I agree. This is one thing I wish they would fix improve. I use workstation and ESX at work and having one snapshot is very limiting when you're used to having multiples and a snapshot manager.
  • Kanaka, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3This adds to one of the reasons i'm glad i dumped Parallels for VMWare. I know Parallels is a relatively smaller company when compared with VMwware (i think) and as a result have to charge for each upgrade but it still sucks either way.
    Another reason was that i found Parallels to be slooower/clunkier than VMware in overall usage (probably due to lack of multi processor support)
  • nuggetz, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2Yay, now I can run compiz in Ubuntu in Vmware on Xp.
  • metzner, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2i was just watching the vid and that guy has like 8 screens wow! vmware rocks i gotta buy it for linux.
  • swtaarrs, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2This is the best version yet! Did anyone notice the awesome new virtual machine library window? VMware is awesome!
  • buzzair, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4I feel like a newb compared to some of the comments so far...but here goes...

    I never liked VMWare because when you set it to expanding HD...it doesn't go back down. For example, if you rip a DVD using AnyDVD & CloneDVD, burn it, and then delete the video_ts folder..the HD space taken remains the same.

    Am I doing something wrong? Is this taken care of in the new version?
    • schoate09, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I'm not sure why you're being dugg down, you make a valid point. The problem is that if you're using a system that can handle such intensive tasks in a virtual machine, chances are your hard drive is so big that the difference in space is really arbitrary.
    • rgov, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1It's easy to grow a disk image -- change some bytes here, move this chunk there, and format the space in between as needed. Shrinking the disk image is another matter -- you have to look at what's been fragmented, what space is unused, etc. It's usually acceptable to let the program slow down to grow the disk image as needed, but if it took the time to shrink it every time you deleted a file, you'd pull your hair out.

      I couldn't find an easy took for resizing vmdk files, but now you know...
  • palmerized, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2For developing websites on my Mac, being able to test in a real version of Internet Explorer is essential... this allows it. Love having Windows XP Pro and OS X on my MacBook Pro. I tried Vista and it runs pretty slow and doesn't support Aero.

    I've got 4GB of RAM, and the odd time things slow down. I've allocated only 512MB to Windows (only need it for IE 7). Generally, it's pretty speedy.
  • micklerlop, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1can I hasz me performance improvements already !!!?
  • Barleyman, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1the only thing keeping me from giving fusion a 10 out of 10, is no snapshot management like is available on their linux product.
  • ozz314, on 05/07/2008, -1/+0virtualbox is great if you are looking for an open source alternative. It has the basics down. Give it some time and it'll surpass vmware and parallels. I have Hardy running on my Macbook and so far so good.
  • YodaJones, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1That demo video with eight monitors is sweet. I also like the "unity" feature that makes it look like the Windows applications are running native on OSX. Well done, and a must have for me when I get my Mac.
  • thestaton, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2I own both Parallels & Fusion and can't say I've used Parallels in a year. Fusion is a beast and 2.0 is looking really exciting.
  • deevay, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Problem I had with VM Ware and why I don't use it anymore is because it heats my damn macbook like a bitch. especially when I would play GTA the temp. would go up to 89 degrees celcius and then it finally fried my hard disk...thank god for apple care.
  • DarkDx, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1"Let's Get Cracking"
    LOL
  • forgeflow, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1can it use more than 2 cores now?
  • Hobofuzz, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Call me when Fusion finally lets me connect to my VMWare Server.
  • clesch, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Parallels did it first, VMware did it right.
  • pyrates, on 05/07/2008, -0/+12 questions:

    -Will this enable me to run Aero Glass in Windows Vista?
    -Will these features also be ported over to the windows version, VMWare Workstation?
    • alpha88, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1If you really *need* Aero Glass, why not just dual boot?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.