Wishlist for VMware Fusion 4...

[OxkAMam]

Given that Fusion 4 is probably not too far off, I thought I'd create a topic where everyone can post their wishlist for the next major version.

For me, I'm reasonably happy with the functionality of Fusion 3.1.2, so I'm not after any major features/changes (although that may change the more I think about what I want/need from Fusion), but below is my list...

1) Keep the stability which I've come to appreciate from Fusion (I know people bang on about how fast Parallels is supposed to be, but I have tried version 5 and 6 and haven't been able to get a stable VM - it's either really slow, or hangs).

2) If they can they can squeeze more performance out of it (which I hope they can), then the faster the better.

3) Proper full support for multi-threaded CPU's. Currently, the multi-threaded part of a CPU core is not utilised, thereby wasting processing power.

3) GUI interface for various tasks. For example, mounting physical disks/partitions in VM's - I know you can use rawdiskCreator, but there should be a simple GUI for selecting the partitions/disks you want in the VM, with Fusion handling the rest. Another example is disabling snapshots for virtual disks - again it can be done by manually adding a setting into the vmx file, but there should be a checkbox setting in a GUI.

4) Improved performance of shared folders. When accessing a shared folder, I get poor speeds and high CPU usage. In Parallels, it's faster with almost zero CPU usage.

5) Fixes for all bugs I've reported.

[aloshka]

Ohhh almost forgot.

4) Horizontal scrolling on magic mice/trackpads.

[Ric_D]

OpenGL support for Linux.

[ehendrix]

Switch to PD6, but more then willing to move back to VMWare (whichever I feel is best at the time I go to). But, here are some features I would like to see:

-) Mount Windows drives in OSX when running the VM. PD can do this and it is something that sometimes can come in handy.

-) Faster shared folder access. This was one of my problems with VMWare.

-) Overall performance. Fusion 3 got beaten up with this; hopeful that Fusion 4 will show that VMWare is the leader in virtualization.

-) Better ability to run a VM with more CPUs giving up timeslices faster to OSX when not working in the VM.

-) TimeMachine Backup support. PD 6 has support for this. It just does not seem to be that hard to me for Fusion to do this by combining snapshots with setting the flag on the current file being written to (last snapshot file) so that TM does not back it up while the VM is running.

-) Support for OSX mouse scrolling. PD has this and it is just handy to be able to use the mouse like one does in OSX.

Really all I can think of right now.

[et381]

1. Improves multimedia performance, both video and audio is pretty bad compared with Parallels 6.

2. Improves on unity, the current implementation is very glitchy and slow, better integration with expose.  eg, sometime selecting a window from expose does not bring it to the foreground.

3. Better dual monitor support, eg, running with two monitor with different resolution, in win7 after screensaver, the ctrl-alt-delete screen is all scambled in v3.1.2, then the screen flicker for quite a while before returning to normal.  Possibly just the way the virtual display driver is implemented.

4. Support time machine backup of VM.

5. Function key lock while in Windows, so we don't have to use the "FN" key on a macbook keyboard.

[ColoradoMarmot]

Two more:

1) A release before 10.7 (Lion) comes out.

2) Day-One Lion support.

[dicen]

Let's just stop beating around the bush here.

Wish: Hire some Parallels developers.

Simple. By the time this version comes out Paralles will be way ahead, again. They are not sitting still here.

VirtualBox, HyperV, RHEV, KVM, Xen and every other Virtualization product is moving faster then VMware. Seeing that VMware is making soo much money, I fail to see why they are unable to keep and attrack top talent. I suspect it has to do with their new management . (Hint, Parallels is primarily based in Seattle Washington. Funny how Apple is also primarily based in Cupertino, CA. I am still waiting for that innovation center their VMware, to innovate something.)

[tmelander]

It is so ironic that you say VMWF 3.1 is so stable and Parallels is not.  I have used VM Fusion since 1.0 and agree it has come a long way, but Parallels 6 has left VM Fusion in the dust.  I have found because Parallels 6 is 64bit it is MUCH faster and I find it more stable.  If you import a VM Fusion image into Parallels then I would say it is not as stable, but if you create an image from scratch on Parallels 6 then it is rock solid and much faster.  That said I look forward to the 4.x beta release....still wondering why it has been about 2 years since any mention of a next generation release.  I hope VMWF 4.x will have 64bit finally, fix the issue where the minimize button does grays out FINALLY when switching between spaces, and provides an actual GUI to create a virtual network like the Windows version of VMWare. 

[ColoradoMarmot]

I completely disagree.  There are only so many 'features' that a virtualization product needs or should have.  Fusion is far more stable than parallels, and has much much better support.

I wouldn't trade that for a bunch of consumer-ish fluff.

[tmelander]

No fluff, only facts based on my years of using virtualization. IMO I have seen VMWF 3 spin up processes suddenly and clocking over 90% of my CPU and it was not the fault of the OS.  Features, VMWF still have a lot to be desired and unfortunately there are a lot of things it could be added like better Unity integration, Virtual Network support (You can do it adhoc with a lot of playing with configuration files, but come on this is the 21st century.).  Serious users of virtualization don't just use it to run Windows on their Mac.   If you don't use virtual networking then you are just an average user.  Here is a link with a good and fair review and opinions.  http://www.atpeaz.com/index.php/2010/3-reasons-why-i-chose-parallels-over-vmware-fusion/

[mjmartin]

From the looks of it, that post is written by a Parallels affiliate. In an effort to keep this thread on topic, what I like best about VMware Fusion is its compatibility with ESXi and Workstation.

I use it professionally, developing web apps in a VM. Everything starts in VMware Fusion & Workstation, I then place it onto our ESXi hypervisors for further testing. When everything is ready for release they go on to our vSphere. The benefit of VMware is in the platform. Better support of Workstation features inside Fusion will make my life easier.

So another feature I'd like to see on the Mac is a version of VMware Converter. Right now, I work in Fusion, have to then copy over to an office PC and use Workstation to get the VM over to ESXi.

[dicen]

Okay, you completely missed the point.

Wish: Hire back your top developers from your competitors.

If you really believe that the new VMware innovation center, will, well, innovate, I have a nice bridge to sell you. Billable hours is not innovation. I am still waiting for all of those new, innovative, software companies, that sell products. Oh, wait, that would be all of those companies on the West Coast of North America that all of your top developers left for.

[Mikero]

Asking us to hire Parallels developers is not a feature request, and borders on trolling.

Let's keep the conversation relevant here please.

Thanks everyone for contributing.

[jay_snyder]

I use Fusion 3.1.2 on my Mac at home (soon will at work, as I'm getting a Mac there too), and Workstation 7.1.2 on both Linux and Windows hosts at my job.

1: ability to close a VM's window, and even close the VMWare application, and leave the VM running, like you can in workstation.

2: abillity to have selected VM's automatically start up on system boot like (like was available with VMWare Server 1.x).

3: support more than 1 GB of RAM in a gust OS w/o the significant slow down it causes now (this is more of a bug report than a feature request).

4: This one might be better to put in Fusion 5 -- Intel Thunderbolt hardware virtualization, kind of like how USB is handled now.

5: An advanced setttings mode that gives access to all options settable in a .VMX file (this should be done for Workstation too), like the NIC type, which I know can be changed in the VMX file, but not via the GUI

[appxjoe]

Hi Mikro,

Three pages of replies and no one has mentioned a tree interface to the Fusion Snapshot manager.  The current snapshot manager in Fusion is really a very poor interface.  There is no way to efficently manage a tree full of snapshots in VMware Fusion.  I am forced to use the vmsd-grapher utility found here http://www.vdberg.org/~richard/vmsd-grapher.html

Please, please, please consider matching the Snapshot manager interface of VMware Workstation.

Way back in 2007 (http://communities.vmware.com/message/733707) A VMware employee said "...The honest truth is that writing a good, Mac-like UI for a complicated  feature like the snapshot manager takes a lot of time..."

Perhaps the employee trying to figure out how to design the tree interface could take a look at VirtualBox, Parallels or the excellent VMware Workstation for inspiraton.

[SteveHarper]

There's just two thing that I really want in Fusion 4. 

1. To be Snow Leopard compatible. 

2. To have much more robust USB support.  Sometimes when I shut down my VM and start it up again, my USB devices are dead in my VM. 

[SvenGus]

It could be interesting - and also very cool - if Fusion 4 were sold also via the Mac App Store, at a reasonable price (or even free, if personal virtualization tends to become free in the future: who knows...): in that way, it could be installed on all one's supported Macs, without the need for buying multiple licenses, which would be a very good thing for those who have multiple Intel Macs at home (I have 5).*

AFAIK, Fusion doesn't install any kernel extensions in /System/Library/Extensions, so probably it should be good to go for the App Store; and if the App Store requires (?) a standalone app bundle, Fusion could be made (for example) à la EyeTV, i.e. with the application support elements self-installed when it is run for the first time.

Just an idea...

* Or, alternatively, change the license to allow multiple installs (without an absolute need for the App Store).

[SvenGus]

You mean Lion...? Fusion, of course, is already Snow Leopard compatible. But probably you mean backwards-compatible, when Lion is out...

[ColoradoMarmot]

I'm pretty sure that Fusion uses (and must use) kext's.

[SvenGus]

Yes, of course: but doesn't it install them - IIRC - in its own /Library/Application\ Support/VMware\ Fusion/kexts folder...?

Thus, it should probably be OK for a Mac App Store application, as it doesn't directly involve the System folder.

Anyway, probably, they have already thought about that (Mac App Store, multiple home licenses, etc.) - well, we'll see...

[SvenGus]

Another feature request (if possible...) for Fusion 4: more complete mirrored folders for Windows guests, as in Parallels; i.e., Desktop, Documents, Pictures, Music, Movies, Downloads, etc.