VMware Fusion 10 will include High Sierra support, use Metal for graphical boost when it s...

Posted:
in macOS edited August 2017
VMware has revealed new editions of its VMware Fusion and Fusion Pro virtualization software, with version 10 bringing compatibility with newer operating systems, a boost to virtual machine graphical performance with Metal support, and the ability to use the Touch Bar in virtual machines.




The user interface for Fusion 10 has been given a facelift, with new virtual machine and "Migrate your PC" wizards improved with changes to both their appearance and functionality. Along with changes including the ability to copy IP and MAC addresses from the Virtual Machine Library window, Fusion 10 is claimed to include "seamless integration with Windows and Linux applications" for what the firm calls a "native Mac application experience."

Support for more modern operating systems has been added, including macOS 10.13 High Sierra and the fall updates for Windows 10 and Server 2016, as well as supporting the MacBook Touch Bar for accessing commonly-used controls. The platform support has also been extended to include Sphere platform features, such as UEFI, Virtual TPM, and virtual NVMe storage devices.

Said to be several years in the making, the addition of Metal support gives the VMware virtual GPU engine a performance boost, along with increasing the accuracy of rendering and improving power efficiency. This inclusion is said to benefit both games and GPU-dependent professional applications, like AutoCAD.




Fusion 10 Pro includes all the updates made to the standard edition, but adds considerably more features that is more useful for developers and IT professionals. Improved vSphere integration adds new controls for managing remote hosts for power operations, to remotely shut down or reboot the system, for example, along with support for the vCenter Server Appliance.

Support for Microsoft's virtualization based security features such as Credential Guard and Device Guard for Windows 10 Enterprise virtual machines, UEFI Secure Boot and a virtual Trusted Platform Module has been added to Fusion 10 Pro's existing security features.

The Swagger-based RESTful API lets developers and operations teams integrate Fusion 10 Pro into their development process, offering a remote services entry point with standard JSON communications. This will provide complete control of VM operations, including inventory management, power management, cloning, networking, and configuration.




The networking side has also received some major changes for professional users, including the ability to simulate packet loss, latency, and bandwidth limiting on both the outgoing and incoming virtual network interfaces on a per-virtual machine basis, allowing for application resilience testing without affecting other running virtual machines. It is also possible to configure Network Address Translation (NAT) rules for each virtual network, as well as making it easier to rename the networks.

Expected to arrive in October, VMware Fusion 10 and Fusion 10 Pro will cost $79 and $159 respectively. Fusion 8.5 customers will be able to upgrade to Fusion 10 Pro for $119, or to Fusion 10 for $49 through the company's online store, though customers who purchase Fusion 8.5 or Fusion 8.5 Pro between August 22 and November 1 will be able to upgrade to their respective newer versions at no extra cost.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 10
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,373member
    Just for informational purposes I can state I've been running VMware 8 in High Sierra since the first developer beta not had a single issue with it although I run on a Mac Pro so no Touch Bar support required for me.  Parallels version 11 works fine in 10.13 beta too.   This is both on HFS+ and APFS.  Carbon Copy Cloner beta 5 backs up VMs from APFS data volumes fine too.  That all said the boost with Metal in VMWare's latest offering sound interesting.  For games Bootcamps is still best obviously.

    edited August 2017
  • Reply 2 of 10
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,979member
    I don't mean to start a pissing match, but are there things VMware can do that Parallels cannot? I use Parallels everyday at work, but I'm just curious as to if one does something better than the other. I'm not necessarily asking which is better, just from anyone who uses both if one does something the others don't. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 10
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,373member
    macxpress said:
    I don't mean to start a pissing match, but are there things VMware can do that Parallels cannot? I use Parallels everyday at work, but I'm just curious as to if one does something better than the other. I'm not necessarily asking which is better, just from anyone who uses both if one does something the others don't. 
    I test both out of academic interest.  Both are just fine, Parallels may be slightly more leaning to being a tad more Mac friendly.  In the end you are using them to run Windows so the Mac interface starts to be a non issue pretty quickly so the difference are more to do with the under the hood issues.  Competition is good so i am glad they are both out there.  I must say for me EUFI support will be nice to have in the new versions when running EFI repair utilities on attached Windows boot drives after cloning them.  For anything requiring GPU power you can't beat simply booting into Windows and not using a VM of course.  So my answer to your question is either is fine for most folks.
    edited August 2017 macxpresswatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 10
    ctwisectwise Posts: 46member
    macxpress said:
    I don't mean to start a pissing match, but are there things VMware can do that Parallels cannot? I use Parallels everyday at work, but I'm just curious as to if one does something better than the other. I'm not necessarily asking which is better, just from anyone who uses both if one does something the others don't. 
    Yes, but probably nothing of interest to you. Most of the benefits to VMware are on the development side. They have better support from third-party and enterprise toolsets (integration with Vagrant, Docker, VMware ESX, etc.) Historically, VMware has been more stable as well. Historically, Parallels has had better Windows graphics performance and support. If you're a software developer (and VirtualBox doesn't work for you), then VMware is the better choice. If you only ever run Windows in a VM to use a few Windows applications, then it doesn't really matter which one you go with.
    irnchriz
  • Reply 5 of 10
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,588member
    Some of the orgs I developer software for already have and use VM images of their environment machines, so I prefer VMWare for that reason, I can use existing images for testing. 
  • Reply 6 of 10
    appexappex Posts: 687member
    Great. VMware Fusion is the only one that works to control machines via USB from Windows on Mac.
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 7 of 10
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,702member
    macxpress said:
    I don't mean to start a pissing match, but are there things VMware can do that Parallels cannot? I use Parallels everyday at work, but I'm just curious as to if one does something better than the other. I'm not necessarily asking which is better, just from anyone who uses both if one does something the others don't. 
    I don't think there is a pissing-contest between VMware and Parallels.  I've never used Parallels and I've been a VMware Fusion user since v2.x.  VMware's support has been stellar for me.  When those rare issues did come up, an actual VMWare engineer would call me and assisting in working through the problem.  Years ago, they even invited me to their shop in Silicon Valley to sit down with their engineers and work through a problem with a USB device.  I was blown away with how passionate their staff were about this product.

    The occasional test between it and Parallels always showed that VMWare had a better performance advantage then Parallels.  Honestly, with today's hardware I think that advantage per-se is moot.  I am a fan of VMware and will continue to use it.

    My only been was a couple years ago when VMWare apparently laid-off their entire engineering staff and outsourced the work to China.  Now.. like fake-news, it might have been overblown.  Not sure about that, but I have been receiving the occasional update albeit not as often as before.  It's still a great product.

    I will be the first in line to buy their new version.  It's one of the few products I happily upgrade to every year.
    pkissel
  • Reply 8 of 10
    As a developer I make my money writing software for both Mac and Windows.  I use VMWare Fusion every day and it's rarely lets me down.  At its current price I consider it a real steal and, like Sflocal, I gladly pay for the major upgrades when they are available.  Keep up the great work and thanks!
  • Reply 9 of 10
    So has anyone run a comparison on benefits compatibility, security, and/or performance of VMware or Parallels vs a solution like Veertu’s VMs (https://veertu.com/veertu-desktop/) running in Apple’s hypervisor framework? I’d be interested in a comparison. 
  • Reply 10 of 10
    This is awesome because ESXi/vSphere couldn't handle Thunderbolt RAID arrays in a supported way and because Docker/Photon integration with that Swagger-like API is going to be great.
Sign In or Register to comment.