Ubuntu 9.10 + VMWare Fusion 3.0.0 -- BROKEN AUDIO -- VMWare? Are you there?

[ivocal]

There are several posts on both VMWare and Ubuntu forums about broken audio with Karmic and VMWare Fusion (2 and 3)

For the record, audio works great when Karmic is installed on my Dell laptop. Audio is broken when installed on VMWare Fusion.

Some people have suggested that removing pulseaudio is a solution to this problem. I have tried this and it does work "somewhat", but I reject it as a solution.

Here are the issues with removing pulseaudio:

1. You lose the System -> Preferences -> Sound controls and with it the ability to select among multiple audio devices. I need the ability to connect multiple audio devices and select among them on the fly.

2. If you suspend/resume then your audio is right back where it was before you removed pulseaudio, so clearly removing pulseaudio did not "fix" the problem.

Why should I have to cripple the OS audio support just so I can use it with VMWare?

Where is the update that VMWare should have pushed out already to solve this problem?

Why is VMWare silient on this problem? Where is your acknowledement of the issue and expected fix date?

Remember, Ubuntu works fine on standard hardware, but not on VMWare virtualized hardware. I would say that this makes it a VMWare problem, since you advertise that you support Ubuntu Linux. Therefore, a series of linux OS tweaks just to get partial audio support cannot be considered a "solution".

Wake up VMWare...

[WoodyZ]

Ubuntu 9.10 is not (yet) a supported OS. So you really have no right to complain.

[ivocal]

Judging by your defensive response and number of posts, Woody, it seems obvious that you are a VMWare developer, and no doubt feeling threatened that someone has called your baby ugly. Of course I have a right to complain when basic functions such as audio do not work with your software. When I installed Ubuntu 9.10, your software did not suggest that it was a problem or unsupported. When I upgraded to VMWare fusion 3.0.0, nowhere did VMWare inform me of a list of exceptions -- things that I should expect to fail miserably. So, please, spare me your lame idea that I have no right to complain about your broken software.

[WoodyZ]

No I'm not a VMware Developer nor do I work for VMware and the list of supported OSes can be found in the 3.0 Help File as well as VMware's web site and the bottom line is if it's not supported then you have no rights to complain!

[ivocal]

If I install Ubuntu 9.10 on a dell laptop that is several years old and it "just works" then I expect it to work on VMWare fusion 3.0 and 2.0 which have the advantage of recent updates. There is no patch forthcoming on my old Dell laptop, yet it works. You get that, right? A new OS works on my old hardware. The same new OS does not work on the latest 2 generations of VMWare virtual hardware. My physical hardware does not come with a list of exceptions. Should I expect less from my virtual hardware? I submit that VMWare needs to make a statement and commit to a timeline for fixing their broken virtual hardware so that it works as well and consistently as my 3 year old physical Dell hardware and, I might add, as well as Parallels Desktop which does not share this very obvious audio problem.

[WoodyZ]

I understand you're frustration however when it comes to virtualization I'm not sure comparing how an OS installs and works on a Physical Machine, regardless of age, to how an unsupported Guest OS works under VMware Fusion is a legitimate foundation to base your complaint on. Not even comparing it to other virtualization products since VMware publishes a list of supported OSes and sorry but Ubuntu 9.10 just isn't on the list yet!

What is it that you just don't get!? If a company posts a list of supported OSes and you want you use one that's not on that list then what do you think gives you any rights whatsoever to complain about it!? Certainly not one thing you've said so far has any validity since Ubuntu 9.10 is not on the supported OS list!

Now if you have a problem with a supported OS then you have every right to complain but until Ubuntu 9.10 or any other OS not on the supported OS list is officially supported then nothing gives you any right to complain about an unsupported OS!

That said I'm not saying that you shouldn't ask VMware to consider supporting it and I'm quite sure they will eventually support Ubuntu 9.10 however they typically tend to be, at a minimum, several months behind a new Linux release of any of the variants that they do support however just because they support Ubuntu 9.04 that does mean they need to support 9.10 as soon as it comes out or ever.

Also VMware typically does not disclose any time lines or details just because someone wants to know however they will announce what they want when they are ready to.

[ivocal]

Wake up VMWare -- fix your broken product.

[Student_Driver]

Not exactly the way to win support on here, but that's cool. In any case, I've had quite a history with that "wonderful" pulseaudio server myself. In my case, it was actually installing it directly on hardware (Dell Mini 9, using Ubuntu Netbook Remix which was designed for netbooks) and I had to remove it because it was miserable. The audio would skip, had a strong static sound to it, and had weird gain issues. Once I removed it, the sound was perfect.

Now, did you try using 9.04 in Fusion 3 with any success? Was the sound OK then? If it wasn't, then you might be better off submitting a ticket to get that fixed since it's using pulseaudio as well. But if it did work fine in Fusion 3, then there were some changes that will have to be addressed and they might be working on them right now. But hey, if you have another product that you like (Parallels Desktop?) then maybe you have to break from Fusion.

On a final note, VMware does, in fact, provide a list of things they do support, and as such that's the list you should be working with when you purchase a product. I regularly use VMware to test configurations that are outside of their support combinations (using ChromeOS as an example), and it runs very, very poorly. There are posts everywhere about how slow it runs in VMware Workstation, Player, and VirtualBox, but I don't believe posting in this manner and attacking someone that's responding (and "accusing" him of working for VMware, as if he were some enemy spy against you) will help that cause.

Dell SXPS 1340, P9600, 8GB RAM

MCSE/MCSA 2003, MCTS, RHCT

[img47]

Unfortunately WMware Fusion is late with each Ubuntu new release. But this time it's more broken than before. Ubuntu 9.10 works fine on physical hardware, it should work fine in any virtualization software. I understand that VMware tools may not work yet, but the core system should. If it doesn't it just means Fusion is not "emulating" standard PC properly.

Just for your information, I have tested Parallels Desktop 5 with Ubuntu 9.10 - works perfectly out of the box (tools installed automatically) - including all integration features. And Compiz works, so you get all the nice graphical effects (as is the case in VirtualBox for some time).

So no doubt Linux/Ubuntu support in Fusion is now severely sub-par versus Parallels and Virtual Box. I hope VMware gets to work and implements OpenGL/Compiz support in Linux soon.

[rcardona2k]

Why is all the "blame" here being placed on VMware? In addition to the testing VMware does in-house to add support for an OS what about Canonical? They must know a portion of their install base runs on VMware and not just Fusion, i mean all of the products (ESX w/VDI, Workstation and Fusion). When Ubuntu installs it detects the virtual hardware and configures itselfs appropriately. If there is some compatibility that allows their OS to work out of the box like it does on older physical hardware they bear some responsibility here too. I'm not on the Canonical forums but I hope you all are as vocal to them as you're being (imo, unreasonably) at VMware.

p.s. if two wrongs don't make a right, my disclaimer is that while I'm a developer, I don't work for VMware. FWIW, neither does WoodyZ.

[img47]

You may be right, but the reason I was complaining here, not on Canonical forums, is that only VMware has this problem. I have tested it on Parallels Desktop 5 trial and it works flawlessly, it seems that sound also works fine on VirtualBox. That has pointed me to "blame" VMware, not Canonical.

[WoodyZ]

You may be right, but the reason I was complaining here, not on Canonical forums, is that only VMware has this problem. I have tested it on Parallels Desktop 5 trial and it works flawlessly, it seems that sound also works fine on VirtualBox. That has pointed me to "blame" VMware, not Canonical.

It really doesn't matter who's to blame because Ubuntu 9.10 is not a supported OS under VMware products therefore trying to "blame" VMware because an unsupported OS is not working properly is ridiculous!

Just what do you not get about something not being supported? If you don't like and/or you just absolutely have to have Ubuntu 9.10 working without any issues and another product can provide you with that then you're certainly free to choose and use a product that does support it. It's really just that simple!

[da485089]

If people are complaining here it is because they want to use VMWare and are experiencing pain in attempting to do so. You suggest they have no "right' to complain, but it seems to me that this is the perfect place to let VMWare know about their difficulties, and yes, complain when things don't work.

[img47]

No need to repeat the same thing again. Please disclose if you are expressing this opinion as a Fusion user (like me) or are you somehow related to VMware/Fusion.

[WoodyZ]

No need to repeat the same thing again. Please disclose if you are expressing this opinion as a Fusion user (like me) or are you somehow related to VMware/Fusion.

I actually now use Parallels as my primary virtualization product on the Mac however I do use other VMware products on Windows and Linux Hosts and now only use Fusion to support my Clients that use Fusion. I'm also a strong proponent when it comes to pointing out something that isn't right with a supported OS or product feature that has issues under a supported OS or is being used in a supported manner however no one has any rights to complain about something that is not working under an unsupported OS, product or manner in any situation where unsupported is a factor and VMware clearly and plainly states what Guest OSes it supports under what VMware products and other system requirements so once again were back at the fact that Ubuntu 9.10 is not (yet) a supported Guest OS and until VMware chooses to officially support it then no one has any rights to complain about it. Did you, or anyone else for that matter, pay any money for a VMware product that states it supports Ubuntu 9.10? NO! So stop complaining about it. If you want to point it out politely and kindly request it be supported as soon as possible that certainly is acceptable however anything other then that is out of line since you or anyone else has not paid any money for a VMware product that states it supports Ubuntu 9.10!

[WoodyZ]

If people are complaining here it is because they want to use VMWare and are experiencing pain in attempting to do so. You suggest they have no "right' to complain, but it seems to me that this is the perfect place to let VMWare know about their difficulties, and yes, complain when things don't work.

Did you, or anyone else for that matter, pay any money for a VMware product that states it supports Ubuntu 9.10? NO! So stop complaining about it. If you want to point it out politely and kindly request it be supported as soon as possible that certainly is acceptable however anything other then that is out of line since you or anyone else has not paid any money for a VMware product that states it supports Ubuntu 9.10!

[da485089]

If you correctly emulate (virtualize) commodity hardware that works unmodified with a variety of new and old operating systems, then there is no need for specific support of each new OS. When something does not work, you can call it a bug, or you can say it is unsupported. I call it a bug.

[Technogeezer]

Please define "correctly emulate". Virtual devices today are not 100% like physical hardware - for example there may be latencies to commands due to the software emulation layer. These could affect operation of drivers and software that are making assumptions about how physical hardware behaves. Also, just like physical hardware, virtual hardware should be re-tested if you make changes to the OS and/or drivers - which leads me to a rant about Ubuntu.

If you look over Canonical's last few releases, Ubuntu seems to continually require VMware to modify its code. Linux has a very nasty and continual habit of breaking kernel ABIs and APIs. At least Red Hat and SuSE have gotten it through their heads that you can't keep messing up the infrastructure if you want a stable platform that people can develop for.

Canonical seems to have only partly gotten the message - at least they offer LTS versions of Ubuntu that are supported long enough to be considered stable platforms for developers.

[Student_Driver]

I just fired up my Fedora Core 12 VM; it appears to play MP3s just fine, and it uses pulseaudio as well. So, I have to wonder what's so different about Ubuntu's implementation that makes it so sketchy on my Dell Mini 9 and inside the VMware products.

Dell SXPS 1340, P9600, 8GB RAM

MCSE/MCSA 2003, MCTS, RHCT

[img47]

Interesting difference:

1. this is how WMware defines supported operating systems (example):

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.3, 4.7, 3.9, 2.1-stock 2.4.9-e3 (Advanced Server, Enterprise Server, Workstation)

Red Hat Linux 9.0—stock 2.4.20-8, upgrade 2.4.20-20.9

Red Hat Linux 7.0—stock 2.2.16-22, upgrade 2.2.17-14

Solaris 10 on x86 (Update 7)

Ubuntu Linux 9.04, 8.10, 8.04.3, 7.10, 6.10, 5.10

Mandriva Linux 2009.1, 2008, 2007, 2006

2. and this is from Parallels:

Linux:

CentOS

SUSE

OpenSUSE

Red Hat

Red Hat Enterprise

Debian

Fedora Core

Mandriva

Ubuntu

Xandros

Frankly saying I much more prefer "Ubuntu", than "Ubuntu Linux 9.04, 8.10, 8.04.3, 7.10, 6.10, 5.10".

I may have made a mistake to upgrade to Fusion 3.... Anybody has any experience with VMware money back guarantee?