1 2 3 4 5 6 Previous Next 81 Replies Latest reply on Aug 26, 2016 3:41 PM by dlhotka Go to original post
      • 60. Re: Fusion's Future
        ExEmployee Lurker

        Thats was what I was wondering as well.  The whole site has been giving me a few issues the past couple days.  Seems to have settled down now.

        • 61. Re: Fusion's Future
          wila Guru
          vExpertCommunity WarriorsUser Moderators

          Hello,

           

          As an active user moderator at this forum I can tell you that we rarely use the "delete" post button.

           

          Even then if a moderator removes a post it has to be moved - not deleted - to a quarantined area only visible by other moderators. So that it can be undone if needed.

          Valid reasons for removing a post are when posting spam, double posts, breaking legal agreements or when a topic gets out of hand and people are starting to post insults directed at other participants of the discussion. For the record, I do not see a post from this thread in the moderator holding area.

           

          As long as the post is on topic we do not remove them and if you have proof of posts being removed then please forward that a moderator by private message as the forum is meant to be an open platform for discussions.

           

          --

          Wil

          | Author of Vimalin. The VMware Fusion Backup app |
          | More info at http://www.vimalin.com |
          | Twitter @wilva |
          | Wiki at http://www.vi-toolkit.com |
          • 62. Re: Fusion's Future
            licensedtoquill Enthusiast

            REPOST FROM ANOTHER THREAD WHERE USERS REPORT FUSION NOT WORKING WITH WINDOWS AND NO ONE AT VMWARE CAN CHIME IN WITH ANY SUGGESTIONS:


            I have in effect been doing the development work with VMWare which they should perhaps have done themselves (BEFORE trying to sell new versions of Fusion on the open market) in that I have been working over 20-30 hours with their technical support team. We have been trying to puzzle out in real life why we are all having these problems with every edition of Fusion after 6.02.  When they couldn't get Fusion 7 to work, they tried installing 8. As all here will know (or as all Fusion users know?) it made matters worse.

             

            They have been flailing around in the dark, without the slightest idea how to deal with the whole 'slowness' problem. Slowness is a bit of an understatement. Windows 7 boot takes 10-20 minutes and starts to a crash.  I am intrigued to hear anyone pondering how to use 3d video programs in a Fusion 7 or 8 VM because VMWare couldn't even get the OS up and running on my system!


            When they couldn't get Fusion to work, VMWare started trying the old 'change technical support adviser and start all over again' trick to see if that would get this customer out of their hair. They would put some new guy on the problem with equally little idea of how, essentially, to get software which doesn't work to work! Each new guy started flailing around in the dark as well, - 'let's see whether the last guy(s) tried to turn off hardware acceleration, let's see whether the last guy(s) tried to increase memory, I wonder if he thought of uninstalling/reinstalling tools?  etc etc'


            "software which doesn't work" Tellingly for a company which makes money by selling software, the only thing they wouldn't try was the only solution users have reported cures these problems: Seeing if Fusion 6.02 works!! Has any user who switched to 6.02 ever reported 6.02 suffering from these problems?  -  Or is it a bit of a stretch to suggest that successful 6.02 users simply don't crop up on these boards?


            Where the company has fired members of it's development team, yet still continues to bring software to market which they know doesn't work and charge members of the public for it, I wonder whether it is time to bring the FTC in on this problem?  Since significant numbers of users want to use Windows VMs, I don't think it is an answer to say that Linux VMs work fine with Fusion?  Or, where no one from VMWare can chime in on these problems, is this a class action law suit situation?


            [2010 MBP El Capitain, 8 GB ram 500GB HDD with 80GB free]

            • 63. Re: Fusion's Future
              Mikero Master
              VMware Employees

              Can you please share a link to the other thread this post refers to?

              • 65. Re: Fusion's Future
                vmxmr Hot Shot

                I just posted a "generic" reply in the original thread, because there is not much information there. I hope that you can add some details about your problem in that thread. Let's see if it jump-starts some help for you from other users.

                • 66. Re: Fusion's Future
                  razvanvilt Novice

                  Alessandro nailed most (but not all) issues:

                   

                  1) Open Source the vmware tools so they can be recompiled for special scenarios, such as but not limited to:

                  1a) the Windows 9x miniVDD can easily be ported to Windows 3.x for hobyists.

                  1b) The VMware Tools for OS X don't work on Tiger, but Tiger runs on VMware Workstation (licensing aside for abandonware). It's about libIconv.5.dylib vs libIconv.7.dylib and others. VMSvga2 by zenith123 works like a charm on Tiger with minor patches. Hobyists are a target as well.

                   

                  2) OS X Hypervisor Framework is a must, some of the developers like going beta and experimenting with new technology. Waiting for the next VMware Technology Preview sucks.

                   

                  3) An overhaul of the networking, as such:

                  3a) Use bridges when in bridged mode.

                  3b) Have the vmnet adaptors also show up in IOKit not just in BSD.

                  3c) Explain in IOKit if they behave like Hubs, Switches or something else. When we do network topology maps using LLTD and LLDP we cannot properly understand/parse the topology. We have LLDP and LLTD responders for OS X already written and we would love to understand the emulated topology in order to reflect it correctly in the component table.


                  4) Have ESXi level of VM customization in an Advanced mode.

                  4a) I don't like having to open a terminal and manually edit a vmx in order to put UEFI mode.

                  4b) I want to be able to remove the virtual scsi adaptor when it's not used without editing the vmx file.

                  4c) Just like with AHCI, we'd like support for NVMExpress.

                  4d) Ability to emulate certain ATA Identify responses (Vendor, Serial, Product, etc.).

                   

                  5) UEFI:

                  5a) Have a changelog for the UEFI firmware as well.

                  5b) Have highDPI support in UEFI based on DPI that you get from the host and make the console the same size as the initial window size.

                  5c) Have a decent console rendering in UEFI (anti-aliasing, etc.)

                  5d) Leave OS X licensing to BSA or Apple, stop being the enforcers for someone else's licensing. We cannot test dual-booting in VM between OS X and something else.

                   

                  6) HighDPI

                  Create DDC values that also reflect the DPI values of the host. If you install Windows 10 on a retina MBP you should get 200% UI scaling. Same with Linux and same with OS X.

                   

                  Updated with HighDPI and UEFI Console Rendering

                  • 67. Re: Fusion's Future
                    danandham Lurker

                    - vmhgfs on linux should be in open-vm-tools so that all kernel modules needed can be in the main kernel

                     

                    This should be happening for Debian and (presumably Ubuntu). See the Debian package maintainers git hub page and comments on the issue at Moving vmhgfs-fuse into open-vm-tools · Issue #4 · bzed/pkg-open-vm-tools · GitHub.

                     

                    Currently the vmhgfs kernel module is in open-vm-tools-desktop while the vmhgfs tools and utilities are in the open-vm-tools package. This doesn't really make any sense and as such has been recognised as a bug. With regard to the fix, I'm not sure if the other distro's are following suite or not. My personal preference would be for the vmhgfs module and tools to be split out into their own separate package - open-vm-tools-shared-folders or open-vm-tools-hgfs perhaps? This way non-fusion or workstation users wouldn't have to have utils and kernel modules for shared folders installed on their VM's. That said, if we finally get use of shared folders from a simple install of open-vm-tools then I'm more than willing to compromise!

                    • 68. Re: Fusion's Future
                      TasmanRay Novice

                      I use Fusion everyday on 5 different production Mac's.  I actually switched to Parallels once and came back almost immediately.

                       

                      There are 2 areas I think you can improve:

                       

                      1.     Better playing nice with iMac 5K's.  I love my 5K iMac but have some graphics headaches with Fusion 8.1.1, particularly on windows resizing randomly.

                      2.     Better support for Digital Certificates.  We do lots of government work which require Digital Certs and my Digital Certs will not work under Fusion so I have to keep one old Windows box around just to use our Digital Certs.

                      • 69. Re: Fusion's Future
                        xahare Novice

                        Another, probably atypical use case: running of apps in a collection of linux vms make with packer and controlled with ansible. you could call this "reasonable" security or paranoia. os x does not have adequate app/gui isolation with virtualization, but it does protect the virtual machines. within the VMs, im using firejail with xpra for the rest of the app and gui isolation. the main reason im not running qubes-os is the lack of nested virtualization. nesting, and performance are why im not running virtualbox, despite virtualboxes advantages in scriptability. the reason im not running linux as the host os is the need to support and work with mac users.

                         

                        one of these VMs runs keepassx. i use it for passwords for other VMs. the vnc server is open to the world (by default), with only a tiny password to protect it! the rest of the world calls this a vulnerability. how long does it take an old laptop to brute force 8 characters? so instead im using a script with ssh and xdotool to auto type between VMs. this is silly, and only works with linux, only with an ssh server running, and will stop working when wayland takes over. please use unix domain sockets that are writable to only by the user running that vmware instance. or, better, make something like "vboxmanage controlvm" for vmrun.

                         

                        speaking of the vnc server, i shouldn't have had to read the source code to packer to find out you can restrict vnc to localhost with a flag in the .vmx file. but, that still doesn't protect it from other users on the mac. why do you hide documentation like that? if you dont want us scripting vmware, just tell us and ill stop

                         

                        also on scripting, ever use vagrant with the vmware plugin? it nags you while you run it. i think some more effort to documenting (or providing for) automation would help this. instead, i do all my vagrant runs with virtualbox. it may be slower, but i can type vagrant up, and walk away knowing that some stupid nag isnt going to interrupt  it.

                         

                        one of the VMs is a malicious device canary. something i think all mac users should have. currently, it only works for usb devices, but it works well. i keep it updated and snapshotted, and revert to snapshot after every use. but, to properly fill this role, it would need a proper usb filter, and if possible, iommu (vt-d) support (can that work through end points of a bus?) also, being able to mask or pass through other ports, such as thunderbolt, would be good here.

                         

                        i noticed the ability to change how much ram a running VM has doesnt exist for any hypervisor on os x. is that just not possible? something to bug apple about?

                         

                        between virtualboxes usb filter, which i recently found out about, and vboxmanage controlvm, ill probably switch to virtualbox for windows and osx guests, and stick with vmware for linux where performance and nesting are needed.

                         

                        playing video games in fusion is obviously safer than on the host. my windows vm has a tree of snapshots for different purposes, this being one. good job making that feasible. any plans to integrate intels work on xengt, or nvidia grid to desktop virtualization?

                         

                        heres a funny idea. why not just port workstation to os x? it feels like mac users get a cut down version of whats available for linux and windows.

                         

                        lately, mostly because of the scripting limitations, ive been seriously concidering dual booting my mac to linux and just keeping the os x partition for os x stuff.

                        • 70. Re: Fusion's Future
                          TECH198 Enthusiast

                          Your not forced to upgrade Fusion.... your asked.. and u can always "skip this version" fusion won't prompt u again as least as of recently.

                           

                          For me, i would like to see more support for OS X running in as a Guest..

                           

                          For some reason Windows is almost "more ahead" with performance, and OS X is also lagging...  even boot times is much slower than Windows in Fusion, particularly when u have an SSD on Mac..

                           

                          This is, i cannot understand, VMWare fusion is a Mac product, yet Windows Guest's have more performance over the main OS Fusion is built to run on. Better support for graphics card..

                          • 71. Re: Fusion's Future
                            vmxmr Hot Shot

                            In case anyone cares, Parallels 12 was just released: Parallels for Mac has a new version, but no huge reason to upgrade | Ars Technica

                             

                            At the end of the article, the author, Jon Brodkin asks, "Whither VMware Fusion?"

                            • 72. Re: Fusion's Future
                              xahare Novice

                              vmxmr said

                              In case anyone cares, Parallels 12 was just released: Parallels for Mac has a new version, but no huge reason to upgrade | Ars Technica

                               

                              At the end of the article, the author, Jon Brodkin asks, "Whither VMware Fusion?"

                               

                              given vmwares competition in the server market, and present superiority in the desktop market, it would be stupid for them to neglect player, workstation and fusion. if anything they should expand on that.

                               

                              still think the mac product line should be fusion -> workstation instead of fusion -> fusion-pro

                              • 73. Re: Fusion's Future
                                VirtualMac2009 Enthusiast

                                Only VMware Fusion allows to control machines via USB from Windows from Mac. Parallel Desktops fails.

                                • 74. Re: Fusion's Future
                                  dlhotka Master

                                  It's how OSX is built - there's no real way for Fusion (or any other virtualization system) to provide accelerated graphics.  MSFT builds windows with virtualization in mid - Apple doesn't.