Next VMware release for Apple Silicon will have full 3D hardware acceleration

Posted:
in macOS

VMWare has released a new tech preview for its virtualization software that runs on Apple Silicon including full 3D hardware accelerated graphics for Windows 11 on Arm.




Announced on Friday, the new VMware Fusion Tech Preview 2023 covers a lot of ground. Most obvious is the inclusion of full 3D hardware-accelerated graphics.

This upgrade brings a new level of graphics performance to Fusion, empowering users to run full DirectX 11 3D games and apps with stunning fidelity and speed," says VMware. "The UI is much more responsive, and when combined with autofit, resolution changes are nearly instant."

The company notes that acceleration extends to emulated 32- ad 64-bit games. It's not clear what performance will be like, but it should be similar to how games run on Windows for Arm.

The new Tech Preview also has support for most of the VMware Tools that ran on Intel Macs. Clipboard sharing is implemented between macOS and Windows 11, and Autofit will resize the virtual machine's resolution automatically as the user expands the size of the window.

Also included are improvements to encryption, giving better security and improved performance at the same time.

In incredibly brief testing by AppleInsider on Friday morning, the 3D hardware acceleration vastly improves the use of the product as an everyday tool. We haven't tested any games yet, but we will be evaluating that in the future.

Friday's release is a "sneak peek," according to the company. The post revealing the update says that there are "a few more exciting features and improvements in the pipeline which are not included in Tech Preview 2023."

The download and a testing guide are available from the VMware website. The company requests that users that choose to install the preview provide feedback to hammer out bugs and improve the experience.

After fighting it for over a year, in February, Microsoft fully authorized the use of Windows 11 Pro and Windows 11 Enterprise within a virtual machine. An official Microsoft support document spells out the limitations of Windows 11 on ARM, and through virtualization solutions like VMware.

For instance, while X86 software will function under virtualization, other components that demand an additional layer, like Subsystems for Android and Linux, will not.


Read on AppleInsider

BiCC

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    VMware is a great company.  But Windows machines are so cheap that you might as well go native.  Apple and Microsoft can easily team up to build Windows or MacOS - But that defeats the entire purpose of the Macintosh specifically.  The MacOS Kernal is sand boxed and does not like virtualisation even if it's UNIX based in Objective C.  It's not a fan of Linux either with the exception of Console.  Apple will need to do something about this in the coming years, they have plenty of power.  Or go at it alone, which is the plan.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 2 of 12
    And Terminal
    williamlondon
  • Reply 3 of 12
    CheeseFreezeCheeseFreeze Posts: 1,250member
    I’m always impressed by this technical feat. This must be incredibly complex software.
  • Reply 4 of 12
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,376member
    I’ve been using VMWare Fusion Player 13 on my Mac Studio since last fall. I’ve been nothing short of very impressed with how well Windows 11 ARM runs on it. Considering the price, which is free for non commercial use, it’s amazing. The only downside is the relative lack of ARM native apps, but the x86 apps I’ve tried run very seamlessly. 

    Did I mention that it’s free for non commercial use? 
    Alex_Vmarcotor949FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 5 of 12
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,327moderator
    BiCC said:
    VMware is a great company.  But Windows machines are so cheap that you might as well go native.
    It depends what for. For high-end gaming it's better to go native. For low-end gaming and software, VMs are fast and easy to share data with.

    They can even run old software that got discontinued on Mac like Quicktime Pro.

    It's a good option for building Windows apps (.NET etc), accessing Windows-only services, converting data like 3D models from 3DS Max, running some CAD software, running accounting software.



    The VMs clean boot in about 10s, resume/suspend in 2-3s.
    dewmerezwitsFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 6 of 12
    dewme said:
    I’ve been using VMWare Fusion Player 13 on my Mac Studio since last fall. I’ve been nothing short of very impressed with how well Windows 11 ARM runs on it. Considering the price, which is free for non commercial use, it’s amazing. The only downside is the relative lack of ARM native apps, but the x86 apps I’ve tried run very seamlessly. 

    Did I mention that it’s free for non commercial use? 
    I have been singing the praises of Fusion Player ever since the first version, and it was solidified when Parallels went to an extor- I mean, "annual subscription" plan.

    As you mentioned, It's FREE - as in FREE.

    We used (paid versions) it extensively on Intel Macs where I was working, and it never spit out the bit.  And kudos should go to the MS teams that made x86 code run on an ARM implementation pretty flawlessly.  I know many Mac fans don't like to recognize anything MS might do well, but to see the performance of some pretty heady software never intended to be run on ARM, is impressive.
    h2pmuthuk_vanalingamFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 7 of 12
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,376member
    Another option for having ready access to a Windows PC from your Mac is to use Microsoft's Remote Desktop and remote into a Windows (Pro) machine. This works equally well when accessing a headless machine. The RDP protocol is amazingly fast. I have access to a fairly decent Windows machine on my home network and often remote into the Windows machine from my Mac. I usually run the Remote Desktop session in full-screen or on a second monitor attached to my Mac. With Apple's Magic TrackPad I can easily swipe to the Windows 10/11 Pro machine. By the way, the Remote Desktop client has no problems running the Windows desktop on Apple's 5K monitors. 

    Remote Desktop with RDP protocol is amazingly responsive when both the Mac and PC are on the same LAN. I have never tried running a game from within a Remote Desktop session. Not sure how it would respond. 

    It's good to know that if you need access to a Windows machine from your Mac setup, for whatever reason, and don't want to add a dedicated keyboard, video, and mouse to your setup you have quite a few options to choose from. With considerations for performance and ease of use I would see any of the following options as viable:

    1) Put a physical Windows PC on or near your Mac setup and use a KVM to switch between your Mac and the PC.
    2) Put a physical Windows PC on or near your Mac setup and use the video input select on your monitor and use a keyboard and mouse that can support more than one device.
    3) Use Remote Desktop client to remote into a Windows (Pro) PC on your local LAN.
    4) Use a VNC client app like Screens to remote into a Windows PC on your local LAN that has a VNC server running.
    5) Install VMware or Parallels and run a virtual Windows PC on your Mac.

    It really comes down to finding out which option meets your needs. I am very happy with Option 3 (Remote Desktop) and Option 5 (VMware) and often do both at the same time with more than one Windows PC without any major hitches. I'm not a gamer. I'm also doing this strictly on my local LAN. Both Remote Desktop and VNC apps can work over the internet, but I have no need to do so. Obviously, doing anything beyond your local LAN requires a few more security and firewall related configuration steps.
  • Reply 8 of 12
    dewme said:
    Another option for having ready access to a Windows PC from your Mac is to use Microsoft's Remote Desktop and remote into a Windows (Pro) machine. This works equally well when accessing a headless machine. The RDP protocol is amazingly fast. I have access to a fairly decent Windows machine on my home network and often remote into the Windows machine from my Mac. I usually run the Remote Desktop session in full-screen or on a second monitor attached to my Mac. With Apple's Magic TrackPad I can easily swipe to the Windows 10/11 Pro machine. By the way, the Remote Desktop client has no problems running the Windows desktop on Apple's 5K monitors. 

    Remote Desktop with RDP protocol is amazingly responsive when both the Mac and PC are on the same LAN. I have never tried running a game from within a Remote Desktop session. Not sure how it would respond. 

    It's good to know that if you need access to a Windows machine from your Mac setup, for whatever reason, and don't want to add a dedicated keyboard, video, and mouse to your setup you have quite a few options to choose from. With considerations for performance and ease of use I would see any of the following options as viable:

    1) Put a physical Windows PC on or near your Mac setup and use a KVM to switch between your Mac and the PC.
    2) Put a physical Windows PC on or near your Mac setup and use the video input select on your monitor and use a keyboard and mouse that can support more than one device.
    3) Use Remote Desktop client to remote into a Windows (Pro) PC on your local LAN.
    4) Use a VNC client app like Screens to remote into a Windows PC on your local LAN that has a VNC server running.
    5) Install VMware or Parallels and run a virtual Windows PC on your Mac.

    It really comes down to finding out which option meets your needs. I am very happy with Option 3 (Remote Desktop) and Option 5 (VMware) and often do both at the same time with more than one Windows PC without any major hitches. I'm not a gamer. I'm also doing this strictly on my local LAN. Both Remote Desktop and VNC apps can work over the internet, but I have no need to do so. Obviously, doing anything beyond your local LAN requires a few more security and firewall related configuration steps.

    Let's take CAD for example: VMware or Parallels will still have unnecessary barriers on the Macintosh.  Let's go to Photoshop or PDF.  It is simply better on the Macintosh.  But here is the interesting part that seldom gets mentioned - Microsoft actually allows VMware and Parallels to exist, Apple would never allow virtualisation of the MacOS.  Just get a windows machine if you need it.  Problem solved - Especially now, they work really well, and are dirt cheap, plug the windows machine into your Mac as a monitor through HDMI.  I won't even get into compiling - you will need native windows.  On Ethernet Windows and MacOS will work seamlessly.  Apple is awesome but Microsoft isn't that evil.  They play fair for the most part.  Apple and Microsoft aren't even in competition anymore, it's not 1997. 
    williamlondon
  • Reply 9 of 12
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,376member
    Microsoft allows VMWare and Parallels because users are expected to purchase a Windows license for each VM. 
  • Reply 10 of 12
    dewme said:
    Microsoft allows VMWare and Parallels because users are expected to purchase a Windows license for each VM. 

    Yes but Microsoft will ALLOW Windows virtualisation on a Macintosh and you have to buy Windows - and Microsoft banks coin.  Apple will NEVER  license the MacOS on anything except which they build.  Hate or Like - Microsoft kills and they will be on par with the MacOS in a few years.  Microsoft has so much legacy 'stuff' that they just can't abandon ship - but they are getting there.  The M chips for Apple are huge, Office was one of the first applications for the M chipset.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 11 of 12
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,376member
    BiCC said:
    dewme said:
    Microsoft allows VMWare and Parallels because users are expected to purchase a Windows license for each VM. 

    Yes but Microsoft will ALLOW Windows virtualisation on a Macintosh and you have to buy Windows - and Microsoft banks coin.  Apple will NEVER  license the MacOS on anything except which they build.  Hate or Like - Microsoft kills and they will be on par with the MacOS in a few years.  Microsoft has so much legacy 'stuff' that they just can't abandon ship - but they are getting there.  The M chips for Apple are huge, Office was one of the first applications for the M chipset.
    Neither Microsoft nor Apple differentiate between physical and virtual machines when it comes to licensing. 

    Apple nixed allowing OS X/macOS or any of its derivatives to run on any platform other than ones provided by Apple. You cannot run a macOS virtual machine on a non-Apple host for licensing reasons. But just like x86 Hackintosh PCs there are probably folks who have figured out how to circumvent the licensing restrictions.

    Microsoft’s primary bread & butter source of revenue for many years was based on selling Windows licenses to OEMs. This was done at many levels and included embedded versions of Windows NT/95/XP, etc., and Windows CE/Embedded running on everything including POS terminals, ATMs, gas pumps, etc.

    I suppose Microsoft still commands a substantial tax payment from the remaining OEMs who sell Windows machines and peripherals, but most of Microsoft’s efforts in the past decade have moved to enterprise and cloud based solutions. 

    The supposed war between Microsoft and Apple was over before it started. Microsoft won on the volume and market share side by supporting huge numbers of hardware platforms and peripherals. Apple won on the per-unit profitability side with a far more integrated solution and tie-ins with their exceptional ecosystem and especially with halo products like the iPhone that work so seamlessly with everything Apple sells, including Macs, software, and services. 

    If you’re a sports fan rooting for your team, be it Microsoft or Apple, you can declare victory on either side because your team won big. But both teams won big and neither team suffered a major setback that inhibited their future growth. Microsoft’s foray into smartphones was a bust, but not a crippling defeat that put the company on the ropes. They found many other parts of their business to make up the difference. The same can be said of Apple’s inability to gain significant market share in personal computers. 

    If either company in the Microsoft vs Apple war is considered the loser, there are 498 other companies in the Fortune 500 who would kill to be losing like whoever you think the loser of that war is. 

    Windows 10/11 and macOS are both superior operating systems. The differences between the two at this point in time are fairly subtle and nuanced, at least for business and personal productivity. But with products like VMWare and Parallels you can often compensate for the remaining subtleties and nuances that affect you by running both systems side by side on your Mac. 

    Win-win. 
    muthuk_vanalingamFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 12 of 12
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,327moderator
    BiCC said:

    Microsoft actually allows VMware and Parallels to exist, Apple would never allow virtualisation of the MacOS.
    They do on Macs:

    https://www.parallels.com/blogs/macos-monterey/

    This is useful for testing beta versions of an OS.


    williamlondonFileMakerFeller
Sign In or Register to comment.