Virtual Box 5.1
virtualbox.org
virtualbox.org
> Also, if you install it on your work PC at some large company, this is still personal use. However, if you are an administrator and want to deploy it to the 500 desktops in your company, this would no longer qualify as personal use.
Not to mention that Parallels licensing is a pain. I understand license key activation as at times a necessary evil but in cases where you are developing a product for use primarily by developers who may frequently re-install their computer, could you at least do some form of trivial hardware checksumming? I had to call support because I'd exceeded five activations of my license. They reset it, after asking why. Several months later, same situation - this time they refused to reset the activation counter. Once loyal customer, no longer, when you refuse to activate software for the purchaser.
Thankfully, Docker et al seem to be making some good strides at making use of Hyve based virtualization in the OS X realm. I'm excited to see how that progresses.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/01/27/vmware_fusion_and_wo...
Agree about Docker using built-in macOS virtualization. Quite hopeful.
Development switched to different people/teams but that doesn't mean it's not under active development. Meet the new team: http://blogs.vmware.com/workstation/2016/07/meet-the-team.ht...
The development team is not in India and is doing more than bare-minimum maintenance, they have "a great surprise lined up for Q3, something very interesting for Q4, and something very big for H1"[1]
[1] http://blogs.vmware.com/workstation/2016/07/meet-the-team.ht...
It doesn't look like Fusion has been discontinued. [1]
"The Fusion and Workstation teams are having a very busy year. Since we shipped Fusion 8 and Workstation 12 almost a year ago, we’ve been busy adding new skills to the development teams so that we can take the products in a new and compelling direction. Added to that, the team has released several updates that you really should be loading on to your systems – they make the products better in a bunch of ways that are described here, here and here."
[1] http://blogs.vmware.com/teamfusion/2016/07/meet-the-team.htm...
As I commented elsewhere[1] (and in more detail) in this thread Fusion/Workstation is not discontinued/abandoned.
All the heavy-duty OOP-first power of Ruby at their fingertips, and people still just copy-and-paste massive files to change a version string...
I have both an active linux and os x env for dev and I use virtual box to manage and switch between. It's been super useful, very reliable, fast enough, and, btw, it's free.
Putting it here because it took me quite a while to figure out why it was 3D accelerated but still so slow.
The funny thing is that VB complains about this configuration whenever you load the console.
Have you tried increasing the video memory for the VM or enabling acceleration?
The only problem is VMWare has abandoned Linux guests in Unity mode for newer releases of VMWare, which likely means you'll be stuck on 7.x and running older guest versions until the end of time.
For me, VirtualBox's deal breakers are:
- VBox doesn't support dual monitors in seamless mode while VMWare does.
- VBox is not capable of running another 64bit OS inside of itself through virtualization, so using Vagrant inside of VBox is not happening. VMWare does not have this limitation.
Fortunately for Windows hosts, the new Linux personality for NT might be good enough for dev work.
Still sucks for people that want to use VMs in a more serious way.
There were just updates for Workstation[1] and Player[2] less than two months ago.
> The team was fired.
The team was replaced, and not simply to do only maintenance patches: "They’ve got a great surprise lined up for Q3, something very interesting for Q4, and something very big for H1."[3]
[N.B. I work for VMware, though not in End User Computing]
[1] http://pubs.vmware.com/Release_Notes/en/workstation/11/works...
[2] http://pubs.vmware.com/Release_Notes/en/player/7/player-714-...
[3] http://blogs.vmware.com/workstation/2016/07/meet-the-team.ht...
I just want to be able to run xubuntu 16.x (and newer when it comes out) in Unity mode without issues but from what I read only 14.x works because none of the guest tooling has been updated.
It's a pity that this use case seems to have put on the back burner. This type of set up is the only way for a lot of people to work without resorting to buying 2 computers or dual booting.
Apparently Workstation 12 removed Unity mode for Linux guests because it was rarely used[1] - I'm just speculating (I don't work in End User Computing) but I imagine that was based on Customer Experience Improvement Program (a.k.a. telemetry) data (I know some people prefer to opt-out of participating but the information is useful, we just implemented it in the product I work on and we're looking forward to being able to make better decisions about feature/bug priority based on it).
If you'd like to provide feedback on Unity support for Linux you might want to tweet to the Workstation team @vmw_workstation (and/or perhaps their PM, @mikeroysoft).
Not really (also, post-7 Player has been re-branded "Workstation Player"[1], presumably so the relationship to Workstation is clearer).
(Not trolling you either, this conversation is just a side effect of your company's naming conventions haha)
Basically I'm asking if the free Player version is going to get continued to be updated so it supports modern Linux guests?
Your original question (and my response) seemed to ask specifically about Unity with regards to Linux. As for more general support of new/future Linux versions my assumption would be that will continue (but that's just my guess as a random engineer in a completely unrelated business unit, you may want to reach out to the Workstation team via Twitter/Facebook/forum for an informed and official answer).
That's a weird turn of phrase. Are they still working there or not?
https://blog.chipx86.com/2016/01/26/a-tribute-to-vmware-work...
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/vmware...
This looks like a clear case where the people developing the product don't actually use it in real life. As a developer and ops person I would say this is very likely the highest priority thing right now because it makes their product unusable for anyone who needs to spin up a VM within their Linux based dev VM.
But it's not like they don't get any security issues at all: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=virtualbox
Note that this only applies to 64-bit virtualisation, you can still run Hyper-V and 32-bit VirtualBox virtual machines simultaneously.