Running ps- aux after quitting (and even after rebooting) OS X 10.4.9 shows several processes from Fusion version 1.0b3 (43733):
root 68 0.0 -0.0 27852 260 ?? Ss 9:59AM 0:00.00 /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/vmnet-natd -c /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/vmn
root 77 0.0 -0.0 27624 220 ?? Ss 9:59AM 0:00.00 /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/vmnet-dhcpd -cf /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/v
root 80 0.0 -0.0 27296 148 ?? Ss 9:59AM 0:00.00 /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/vmnet-netifup -d /var/run/vmnet-netif-vmnet8.pid vmnet8 vmne
root 83 0.0 -0.0 27296 156 ?? Ss 9:59AM 0:00.00 /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/vmnet-netifup -d /var/run/vmnet-netif-vmnet1.pid vmnet1 vmne
root 86 0.0 -0.0 27624 220 ?? Ss 9:59AM 0:00.00 /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/vmnet-dhcpd -cf /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/v
root 88 0.0 -0.0 27780 492 ?? Ss 9:59AM 0:00.00 /Library/Application Support/VMware Fusion/vmnet-bridge -d /var/run/vmnet-bridge-vmnet0.pid vmnet0
Can someone explain why and/or how to change this other than uninstalling?
These background processes are meant to start when your system boots. They handle your virtual machines' networking.
VMware Fusion starts them at boot time so it doesn't have to ask for your administrator password every time you start a virtual machine.
You can stop them with "sudo /Library/Application\ Support/VMware\ Fusion/boot.sh --stop" (and --start when you want to run Fusion). Note that Fusion doesn't warn you if the services aren't running (VMs will just fail to run) since the expectation is the average consumer won't be doing this.
Hmmm... too bad VMware can't find a workaround. It would be nice to not have these processes running all the time when Fusion isn't. It's a little disappointing that the user has to be on top of the processes that a program is spinning off which, little by little, drain the resources of a system as more programs are installed but may not be running.
I agree with BillSaysThis, this is the one thing that is so annoying about Windows. Every vendor thinks they are the only one who is installing software on a user's machine, so they each place a System Tray icon and install background processes. This if fine, except for when twenty different applications do the same thing.
This Windows Paradigm doesn't belong in OS X, you can always tell a company that ports an application to OS X, rather than that being their primary platform.
As for whether it is using resources when it is sleeping; it may not be using CPU cycles, but it is using memory, etc. The only way to not use "resources" is to not have any process running; which is what it should do.
And why can't they get around asking for the password everything by using the keychain like other apps do? Or at least give the option of asking for it every time; if you use Fusion once a month, that's a minor thing.
I disagree with that.
iTunes and EyeTV leave crap running on my system all the time, and neither of those were ports.
But yes, I agree. Well behaved software shouldn't leave stuff running when you're not actively using it. While I understand WHY they do what they do, it's still annoying that if I take what should be a quiescent system (be it Windows or OS X), I can't fit the process list on one screen.
It's not using memory resources either. OS X pages background processes to disk, and they stay in the pagefile until they're woken up.
This really isn't the 'Windows Paradigm,' it's the UNIX paradigm. Run Activity Monitor, and have it tell you all the processes the system is running. You'll see that OS X itself has dozens and dozens of background processes.
This mechanism for allowing access to the network makes the most sense. It's completely transparent to the user
they don't have to enter passwords or have any interactions with the UI. It fulfills the OS X concept of 'it just works' because anytime you start VMware, the network will 'just work.' This ease-of-use comes at absolutely no cost to the userthe processes do not consume CPU cycles, and do not consume memory.
It is possible to design background processes that run in this efficient way. I imagine that the people working on VMware have the knowledge and expertise to do so, given all the other OS/CPU-type hacking they're doing to get VMware working.