Hacker News Reader

Why does the VMware Fusion provider cost $30 more than VMware Fusion itself? I'm not against commercial software, but the price is off-putting, particularly for personal use.

View on HN

I actually tend to view it as $20 less than the professional version of Fusion ($99). :) Hehe. But, yes, the provider works with the trial, regular, and professional versions, so you can argue it is $30 more.

The reason is that VMware Fusion is woefully underpriced on Mac OS X systems, due to steep competition from Parallels. The equivalent on Windows is $249.

My argument is that the value you get out of something like Vagrant + VMware Fusion pays for itself in less than an hour per seat (assuming you're billing more than $79/hour). I find that to be pretty good value, rather than comparing it directly to VMware Fusion.

But the alternatives aren't Vagrant + Fusion versus VMWare on Windows. The alternatives are Vagrant + VirtualBox versus Vagrant + VirtualBox, which is zero cost.

I thought that price included VM Fusion -- as in for $30 more you get the provider also.

Agreed. I was previuosly excited by it, but at this price point, I am no longer. It puts it out of the impulse-buy-to-try-it-out range and squarey into the "I can do without it".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com