Like the subject says, I'll be doing something of a report to some of the brass about how it's going, but I wanted to extend the opportunity for folks to call out how we've done with this year's TP.
Reading the discussions here, testing it internally and listening to folks on the site-formerly-known-as-the-bird-app, I think we've got a good handle on how things are going, but I wanted to make sure folks had a tangible avenue to share both grievance and praise where due.
I'll take quotes from this thread and share directly with the team!
In general, the team has done well, but... you've not caught up to Parallels.
The good:
The "not so good":
I hope Suspend/resume and creating snapshots can be faster. Now these operations are very slow.
Thanks for the opportunity!
Overall, there's solid progress - enough that I see a path to retiring my parallels license and returning to Fusion full time.
Initial 3d Acceleration is good to have, though there is some (as expected) troubleshooting to work through. The team has been really responsive as we raise issues, which is greatly appreciated.
Clipboard integration is wonderful to have back, and drag/drop performance (and shared folder performance on Linux) are nothing short of amazing. Lack of shared folders was honestly disappointing, but the team made the right call on prioritization, and it was much better to have released the TP than hold for shared folder support. Still would like to see that feature accelerated for inclusion before GA (hint to management - give Michael and team more staff!)
User experience is still behind the competition, both for installing windows, and graphics performance. Not sure if there's a way to integrate the process to get the ISO the way Parallels did, but if there is, that would be a huge improvement. 3D Graphics are good, but there are gaps, especially with higher texture settings in games (causes crashes). Know the team is actively working in this area (again a shout-out to the solid communication with users).
One surprise was the appearance of issues upgrading windows 11 ARM VMs from Fusion 13 to the TP. Significant visual artifacts in games. Building a new VM from scratch solved it - this is the first time ever (and been using since 1.0) that an upgrade had that kind of issue.
Fixing the Airplay bug was greatly appreciated! The background item bug is still there and really needs to be squashed.
Lack of official MacOS virtualization supportis disappointing to part of the community, but again, I think it's low priority compared to solidifying Windows support. There is a use case for this, so if Apple's API matures, it would be worth evaluating the market to see if reactivating VMWare tools development makes sense. If not, then there's not much reason to duplicate peer functionality with free options. ARM only of course - ceasing development on Intel support makes total sense.
Overall? A good solid B for the product, and an A+ for communication with the TP community.
@ColoradoMarmot wrote:
Overall? A good solid B for the product, and an A+ for communication with the TP community.
I'll echo the ratings. It is especially pleasing to see the developers actively participating in the TP forum. It shows me that VMware is taking this seriously and is interested in squashing these bugs before release.
Just my own comments regarding ColoradoMarmot's reply above:
"User experience is still behind the competition, both for installing windows, and graphics performance. Not sure if there's a way to integrate the process to get the ISO the way Parallels did, but if there is, that would be a huge improvement."
Although I absolutely love Parallel's ease of use for the Windows ARM install, ultimately in the end I'm preferring the VMware implementation even though it's a bit more work. This comes down to the Parallels Windows install not being OOB, including things like auto login, some apps/features missing or not being OOB (e.g. I believe OneDrive or Teams was missing) versus the Vmware install being a 100% fully OOB experience.
So although I'd like something less time intensive to install, I'm willing to jump through the technical hoops to get something that is fully OOB. But mind you, if you're able to automate the install and also keep things OOB, then I'd be thrilled. Just my own two cents.
Fair, I was speaking more to just getting the ISO. I actively do not like the system where parallels takes control and you don't even get a chance to set a username.
A better Fusion Applications Menu, perhaps…? The current one needs to be modernized (with a real dark mode support, first of all). And also nested virtualization on Apple Silicon: but this depends entirely on Apple, which sadly hasn’t yet implemented it in macOS Sonoma. Of course, there are much more urgent priorities - but maybe at a later stage, hopefully…
Overall I appreciate that VMWare is progressing with updating Fusion. The Windows support on Apple Silicon is dramatically better. Ubuntu is ok. Mac OS virtualization is missing. Here, we rely on virtualizing MacOS for testing everything from betas to old OS versions, and we do a lot of experimenting of anything we don't wan to do on our work computers.
Several features I would really like to see:
- a passthrough for playing video or web streaming in the guest VM to prevent the host display being turned off.
- Thunderbolt support. As we move to more thunderbolt devices, this is a must have.
- Again, MacOS as a guest.
I think it would also be appreciated by the entire community and it would show more support from VMWare if updates were more frequent and included more features bringing Fusion in line with the alternative. I prefer Fusion for technical reasons in addition to several less tangible ones. More responsive updates than the basic yearly advancement would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
… Forgot this: maybe also an option to hide the Dock icon and show only the VMware Fusion Applications menu (as in UTM, but of course with complete features), from which you can control almost everything…? Another UI glitch that maybe should be fixed is the title bar of the VM window: currently, it doesn’t seem to comply with the “new” Big Sur+ metaphor, where the title should be at the beginning, towards the left (thus avoiding it to move and eventually even become more or less displaced towards the far right: see also the image below, taken from the web)…
Hello,
I'm probably late to the party in this thread, but please convey to "the brass" that they should keep the current licensing model for VMware. Parallels is horrible with their subscription model. If you stop paying, the software stops working. I used to be a Parallels customer until they took the advanced features that I used to use and put them in the subscription tier. In comparison, VMware has a good tiered licensing plan for VMware Fusion that does not rely on a subscription, and I really like that. They don't hold me hostage in being able to access my virtual machines without an extortion fee like Parallels does.
Please don't let anyone in the boardroom think that the subscription model is a good idea. I can guarantee that you'll lose me as a customer if you go the subscription route. Yes, I always upgrade to the latest version when it comes out, but it's because I choose to, not because I'm forced to.
Thank you for listening, and thank you for all the hard work.