RSS| sparskter | Oct 28, 2009 | 7.0 Build 203739 |  5 out of 5 |
The best one period. I bought a license myself yesterday; I am using linux as host and winxp as guest 1- VMWare supports IMGBURN inside guest winxp; 2- VMWare supports AcTiveSync (I own a HTC win mobile ); 3- VMWare best feature at all: SNAPHOTS. You can take any snapshot and travel between them in any order you like. VMWare is an effort of thousands people (engineers) EXCELLENT work! OBS: NOW YOU HAVE TO BUY ONLY ONE LICENSE! THAT IS IT: YOU BUY A LICENSE FOR VMWARE WORKSTATION AND USE IT EITHER AS WINDOWS OR LINUX HOST. OBS: DO NOT RATE 1 STATING "OLD VERSION"!!! TTHAT IS NOT VMWARE FAULT!! IT'SS BETANEWS!!! |
| Bart Welson | Jun 3, 2009 | 6.5.2 Build 156735 |  1 out of 5 |
OLD version ! |
| Artem Tashkinov | Jun 2, 2009 | 6.5.2 Build 156735 |  4 out of 5 |
Someone at betanews is ultimately inattentive as this version 6.5.2 build 156735 was released two months ago. As for application itself - I miss VMWare 4.x, which was much snappier. Earlier I said: Reviewing 6.5.1 Build 126130 (Nov 22, 2008) Download package could be split into smaller files, otherwise it's a perfect software. |
| kholdstare | Jan 19, 2009 | 6.5.1 Build 126130 | 5 out of 5 |
only good virtual machine software out there. with Microsoft VirtualPC software being too slow and suns free stuff which has the same issue with all free software which is full of bugs and very little people to work on it. you ignorant wannabe experts can stick with your free bug ridden software. me, i'll stick with something that i have to pay for but i know that works right |
| roj | Nov 24, 2008 | 6.5.1 Build 126130 |  3 out of 5 |
The only reason I'm downloading this product is that it's on my current build and I want the update in the hope that it will resolve some long standing issues. When my corporate workstation is rebuilt, it will be replaced with Sun VirtualBox which is smaller, lighter and free. Since Version 6, this software has been problematic with issues ranging from network related keyboard buffer problems to erroneous error messages in the Event Log from its DRM component (the authenticating service) about being unable to connect to a VMDK. As far as I'm concerned, it's simply not worth the trouble or the price tag. VirtualBox will give me everything I need, I won't be charged a cent for it, it consumes less resources (I run an Athlon64 6000+ AM2 w/4GB RAM under XP64), is less invasive on my system and doesn't clutter my Even Log with useless errors that are not resolved no matter how often you bring them to VMWare's attention. With Sun breathing down their necks at one end and Microsoft hamstringing them at the other, the days of this version of the software (Workstation) are numbered – and given Version 6, that fate is warranted. Finally, the download process to get this software is arduous and annoying, requiring a registration. Novell perpetuates the same stupidity. People (and all vendors who do the “register to download” thing), I just want to download your software. I'm not interested in your marketing department trying to keep tabs on me or offering me so-called “value added” nonsense. Just let me get to the software and download it with a single link and get out of my hair. TWO stars for all the cons iterated above that are not commensurate with the pros provided. EDIT: My God, the moon is indeed made of Bleu Cheese! VMWare actually finally fixed the VMDK error! They get another star just for that - after all, it only took them SIX iterations to get it right. THREE stars. |
| Phoon | Nov 22, 2008 | 6.5.1 Build 126130 | 5 out of 5 |
Not worth the price? Download too big? OMG, you have to be joking. Unless you are on dialup then file size is not a problem, especially with todays hard drive sizes. If HD space is an issue for you then you have no business running a VM. VMWare is the standard by which every other solution tries to emulate. Top notch in every way. Worth every penny spent. |
| Loxx | Nov 22, 2008 | 6.5.1 Build 126130 | 4 out of 5 |
Release notes: http://www.vmware.com/su...releasenotes_ws651.html |
| Artem Tashkinov | Nov 22, 2008 | 6.5.1 Build 126130 | 5 out of 5 |
Download package could be split into smaller files, otherwise it's a perfect software. |
| Carlos V | Nov 21, 2008 | 6.5.1 Build 126130 | 3 out of 5 |
|
| Joco | Nov 21, 2008 | 6.5.1 Build 126130 | 3 out of 5 |
Download size: about 600 MB. Price $180. VirtualBox 2.04: free, including for commercial use. Download size: 35 MB. I have compared VirtualBox .04 against VMWare WS 6.5.118166 since two weeks now. VBx does better, especially when guest OS is Ubuntu (mouse integration from VMWare didn't work). I am not convinced that VMWare WS is faster, quite the contrary. I didn't make precise benchmark but roughly I feel that VirtualBox is more responsive, boot faster and consume less resources. In summary, I think VMWare workstation is not worth its price. |
| gawd21 | Nov 14, 2008 | 6.5 Build 118166 | 1 out of 5 |
Waist of time, money, and HD space. You have to jump through 10 million hoops to even get this, then they want to over charge you, and then the footprint if lastly larger than all of the easy to get free programs that do everything - but the Mac OS - that VMWare can do. Get a grip. |
| Undesired Username | Nov 13, 2008 | 6.5 Build 118166 | 4 out of 5 |
I love it, but the VMware Workstation installation folder now devours 1.25 GB of disk space! |
| DeadFly | Sep 25, 2008 | 6.5 Build 118166 | 4 out of 5 |
Keeps getting better. I'm pretty excited about the "Unity" feature, but it seems to slow things down a bit. There may be some free workstation VM products, but the performance and features are still lagging VMWare for now. One other option if you're not adverse to spending money is Windows 2008 HyperV. The performance is amazing and with some setup, Win 2008 isn't too bad as a desktop OS (or just run your "workstation" in a VM). |
| Registered | Sep 25, 2008 | 6.5 Build 118166 | 5 out of 5 |
great package, but 550MB download, it sure is growing in size, even though x64bit is included, still great package, and performance just keeps getting better, although is should be mentioned that "http://www.virtualbox.org/" is growing aswell, and it's free, and being well suported, and there version 2 is very good, but performance is no where as good, but with dual and quad core CPU's in most systems, virtualbox is a good choice for average consumers, |
| Morphus | Sep 25, 2008 | 6.5 Build 118166 | 1 out of 5 |
I even can not setup, it prompts "Setup failed to generate the SSL keys necessary to run VMware Server" |
| Zer0 Voltage | Jun 25, 2008 | 6.5 Build 99530 Beta | 4 out of 5 |
@Max_Real Qnx: I haven't used the 6.5 beta yet, but assume it is supposed to support accelerated 3D now in an automated fashion (unlike previous versions). But since this is a beta release, perhaps this support just isn't 100% perfected yet? With version 6.0.x releases, you had to manually edit the .vmx file associated with the client OS and add a few special entries (along with possibly preparing the host - like making sure hardware acceleration is set to full). See here for full details: http://pubs.vmware.com/w...d_enabling_guestos.html If this guess is correct and this support just isn't finalized yet in the beta, perhaps following those manual instructions will work? I suppose you can also try installing the latest full DirectX end-user runtime redist package - which is currently June 2008 and is available here: http://www.microsoft.com...c557%26DisplayLang%3den I've always installed the latest full DX redist immediately after modifying the .vmx file and before doing any testing, so I don't know if it's actually capable of fixing a problem like yours or not. Can't hurt to try though. :-) And of course, since I haven't tried the beta, I also don't know if there's now something special you need to do in either VMWare Tools (within the client OS) or the virtual client machine's settings (on the host through the VMware interface). So check both places just in case. There may be an option somewhere. Just as a heads up though, at least with the 6.0.x releases, even when it works it's limited. From what I saw, only "older" DX packages worked (and obviously more slowly than on a host). Most of the newer stuff (DX9+) just hung or did something ugly to the video. Good luck! |
| DJHasis | Jun 25, 2008 | 6.5 Build 99530 Beta | 4 out of 5 |
Good, working and faster compared to some other virtual machines. Sad that it isn't free :( Max_Real Qnx: are you sure you installed vmtools? It's a packet that enables different functions depending os, and if I remember correctly, it enables directx in windows-systems. |
| Max_Real Qnx | Jun 7, 2008 | 6.5 Build 91182 Beta | 1 out of 5 |
Guest Operation System Windows Xp Professional Host System Windows Xp Profess?onal I'm install VMware Tools to Guest System. But Direct 3D Acceleration don't working on guest operation system :p Screen Shot: http://img68.imageshack.us/img68/1482/wm65tm6.png |
| SELonBN | May 15, 2008 | 6.5 Build 91182 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
The new Unity feature is so nice! I've enjoyed it in Fusion for the mac and am glad it's come to other platforms. I find this product getting better all the time. Migrating VMs to another computer keeps getting easier and I plan to start making use of the Record/Replay functionality instead of collections of PrintScreens for documenting certain procedures. I wouldn't complain about bloat because I run it on powerful machines with plenty of RAM. For a less powerful PC, Virtual Box is a little quicker - and that product is growing features at a good clip also. I have personally purchased VMware for 2 platforms and don't regret it at all. |
| marty | May 15, 2008 | 6.5 Build 91182 Beta | 3 out of 5 |
I spent a lot of money on VMware Workstation when it was the only game in town. The only feature it has which Virtual Box (I won't talk about Virtual PC) is that it can run 64-bit guests. Virtual Box is working on that. It now has the resources of Sun. There are many problems with WS - just look at the forums where problems (like connectivity which the other reviewers pointed out) - every 5 minutes. I'll check out this beta since I have room for it but I sure would spent more money on a terribly bloated program (360+ MB!) |
| MickyFoley | Apr 2, 2008 | 6.5 Build 84113 Beta | 4 out of 5 |
VMWare is a great application but there are several things, that must be done. http://www.vmware.com/pr...asenotes_ws65_beta.html |
| roj | Mar 17, 2008 | 6.0.3 Build 80004 | 1 out of 5 |
darkwzrd1: Read more carefully and having read do attempt to comprehend. I didn't say I had trouble installing an OS under VMWare. I said that I was getting a message in the Windows Event Log that said that VMWare couldn't connect to a vmx file. The service producing the error was their DRM authentication beastie. That problem surfaced in the betas for version 6 and has persisted. It's finally fixed in 6.03. Finally. However, the VMWare Tools upgrade process doesn't work worth a damn for existing VMs. I used the "Upgrade" option for VMWare Tools in three completely different VMs - I even uninstalled Tools first. All did absolutely nothing. This isn't a surprise - this company's QA is about as robust as George W. bush's domestic policies. Fix one thing, break another. Might I also add that my lineage with this product goes back to version 4 - considerably longer than your one year. Edit: The VMX error persists. ONE star for VERY poor QAT. |
| darkwzrd1 | Mar 17, 2008 | 6.0.3 Build 80004 | 5 out of 5 |
roj how the hell are u having issues installing a OS with VMWare, you have to be moron. I have openSUSE, FreeBSD and Windows 2008 Server installed and it runs perfectly! I have never had an issue with this software and I been using it for well over 1yr on Windows, Mac and Linux platforms. |
| guti | Mar 17, 2008 | 6.0.3 Build 80004 | 4 out of 5 |
Not bad, but probably the free VirtualPC, or the Open Source VirtualBox, will also do the job. |
| roj | Oct 19, 2007 | 6.0.2 Build 59824 |  2 out of 5 |
Still has the "Cannot connect to .VMX" error, even on fresh installs on a newly installed OS. The Bugfest Continues. TWO stars. |
| Artem Tashkinov | Oct 19, 2007 | 6.0.2 Build 59824 | 5 out of 5 |
It's brilliant ... except the download is very big! |
| roj | Oct 16, 2007 | 6.0.1 Build 55017 | 3 out of 5 |
Stay the heck away from this bugfest. VMWare 6 is full of nice little gotchas, like the penchant to switch your keyboard into autorepeat mode if the network connection isn't optimal (try logging into a VM when every keystroke you type is repeated multiple times - there is a workaround available but it's a kludge) and of course my favorite, the "Cannot connect to VMX" error i the Event Log (no workaround for this one - setting a service dependency is pure crap). None of this was in evidence with 5 (which had quirks of its own, many of which are gone with 6 but a whole new generation has been spawned). Until these guys give the software a much needed de-lousing, I'd recommend you give it a bye. It's incredibly useful - when it works. I'll give it THREE stars until they get their act together. |
| DataBitz | May 10, 2007 | 6.0 Build 45731 | 5 out of 5 |
Keeps getting better. For the record, to the earlier poster VM Server does support Sound. The main thing missing from VM Server is multiple snapshot support. |
| zridling | May 9, 2007 | 6.0 Build 45731 | 5 out of 5 |
Love this app; just wish I could afford it. |
| Artem Tashkinov | May 9, 2007 | 6.0 Build 45731 | 5 out of 5 |
Simply the best in its class! And actually you can use it for free: download VMWare Player 2 and VMX builder http://petruska.stardock.net/software/ |
| spiked | Apr 20, 2007 | 6.0 Build 44426 RC | 5 out of 5 |
VMware Server CAN be run with a single machine. It acts as both the client and server. However, performance is not optimized for this configuration, audio is not supported, and configuration may seem a little confusing to average home users. With 6.0, Workstation actually inherits one key aspect of the Server architecture: The GUI is separated from the VM manager, so you can close the Workstation window while leaving a VM running in the background and just reconnect to it later. Good for saving memory when running long unattended processes in a VM. Along with things like x64 guest support (not just x64 hosts) and USB 2.0, VMware extends its already-huge technology lead over Microsoft. |
| slushdot | Apr 20, 2007 | 6.0 Build 44426 RC | 5 out of 5 |
@Alex Because the server is exactly that, a server. You can't run the images using just 1 machine, which is a PITA for many people. |
| Alex Stevens | Apr 20, 2007 | 6.0 Build 44426 RC | 5 out of 5 |
It's a great program, but why would you pay $189 for this when their VMware server is completely free and does the same thing as this (and more). Baffling... |
| oomingmak | Mar 26, 2007 | 6.0 Build 42757 Beta | 4 out of 5 |
Generally excellent product, but a point off for not starting and stopping VMware services with the application. What is the point of having all these services running day in day out if you're not actually using the program? I'd also like to see graphic performance improve (e.g. to test eye candy style apps) as this is the one area where you still really "feel" that you're you're in a virtual machine rather than a real one. Also, I wish they'd make VMware tools easier to install and work with in Ubuntu. It's hellish for a noob like me compared to the pure simplicity of installing it on Windows. But all in all, it's an excellent app. |
| Artem Tashkinov | Mar 26, 2007 | 6.0 Build 42757 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
VMWare 6 RC now has ACE2 built in. Other changes are mention here: http://www.vmware.com/co...714&tstart=0#607045 (Registration required). |
| hondaman | Mar 26, 2007 | 6.0 Build 42757 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
Good as it gets. I was hoping for DX support in this release, but guess that will have to wait. Again. Release notes are here: http://www.vmware.com/pr...asenotes_ws60_beta.html |
| twosheds | Mar 25, 2007 | 6.0 Build 42757 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
Don't TOUCH VirtualBox. This is from their own site: "If VirtualBox messes up your USB stack on Windows and you can no longer work with your USB devices, try removing VBoxUSBFlt from LowerFilters" Severely screwed with my PC during installation and did indeed freeze my USB mouse. Not even an alpha candidate yet. VMWare might add a few more services and Start-Up items than Virtual PC, but it never scared the hell out of me like VirtualBox did and works well. |
| the Irf | Mar 5, 2007 | 6.0 Build 39849 Beta | 3 out of 5 |
At first I used VmWare, thought it was awesome and at that point it was! But when I found out about VirtualBox, s***+del was the only thing to do for VmWare. VirtualBox http://www.virtualbox.org/ much faster than VmWare Compare the size: VirtualBox 14 MB VmWare 273MB |
| FailedCRC | Feb 11, 2007 | 6.0 Build 39849 Beta | 4 out of 5 |
Mmm, just as well I kept my v5 installer. BSOD on Vista upon starting a VM. |
| ermax18 | Feb 9, 2007 | 6.0 Build 39849 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
To disable debug in the beta, rename the bin-debug directory bin-debug.back. Then make a copy of the bin directory and name it bin-debug. I love the ability to run machines as a service and the ability to connect to a machine via VNC. I haven't figured out a practical use for the new recording feature. What did we do before we had VMware? |
| delt21 | Dec 27, 2006 | 6.0 Build 36983 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
Just got one bad thing to say against this release, it runs in Debug mode and Debug cannot be disabled or bypassed like in older version, this simply means it will run slower the the final release. In a positive note it installed and is running fine in Windows Vista 32bit. My Vista host is running in an AMD Athlon 1800+ with 1GB of ram and it seems running at an acceptable speed (I did disable logging to compensate for the Debug mode and to speed things up). |
| evanr | Dec 27, 2006 | 6.0 Build 36983 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
I am not reviewing this program just answering a question. Some Guy, you should dual boot linux and partition it and all that crap. its not hard and it gives u a nice OS chooser. the only problem is that the linux partitioner is crappy and can at times ruin your partition table. try to find an alternative for partitioning. my favorite although expensive is acronis disk director suite. it includes other programs too. this suite allowed me to get files back after linux partition ruined my partition table |
| some guy | Dec 27, 2006 | 6.0 Build 36983 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
I have to try this could someone answer this qestion? does this have to have a os running to work? more or less I mean do I have to have windows running then open another operation system? or does this work off the boot screen? my computer cant handle 2 Os at the same time. But I would like to install a linux with my xp, or should I just partion and all that crap? anyinfo would be great. |
| skrzat | Dec 27, 2006 | 6.0 Build 36983 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
http://www.vmware.com/pr...asenotes_ws60_beta.html |
| phillip.v@cx7solutions.com | Nov 29, 2006 | 5.5.3 Build 34685 | 5 out of 5 |
VMWare workstation is a brilliant product for running multiple operating system at the same time. The VMWare Tools gives seemless integration between the Guest and Host operating system. Here is a link to an Linux Guest Install Tutorial: http://www.cx7solutions....ux,workstation,inst_rh3 |
| HelgeFossmo | Nov 21, 2006 | 5.5.3 Build 34685 | 5 out of 5 |
New in Version 5.5.3 Updated Support for Host Operating Systems Workstation 5.5.3 adds support for the following host operating systems: * Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4.0, Update 4 (AS, ES, WS), 32-bit and 64-bit * Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0, Update 8 (AS, ES, WS), 32-bit and 64-bit * Experimental support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.0, 32-bit and 64-bit * Mandriva Corporate Server 4, 32-bit and 64-bit * Experimental support for Mandriva Linux 2007, 32-bit and 64-bit * Experimental support for Ubuntu Linux 6.10, 32-bit and 64-bit Updated Support for Guest Operating Systems Workstation 5.5.3 adds support for the following guest operating systems: * Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4.0, Update 4 (AS, ES, WS), 32-bit and 64-bit * Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0, Update 8 (AS, ES, WS), 32-bit and 64-bit * Experimental support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.0, 32-bit and 64-bit * Experimental enhanced support for Microsoft Windows Vista, 32-bit and 64-bit * Mandriva Corporate Server 4, 32-bit and 64-bit * Experimental support for Mandriva Linux 2007, 32-bit and 64-bit * Experimental support for Solaris x86 10 6/06 (Update 2), 32-bit and 64-bit * Experimental support for Ubuntu Linux 6.10, 32-bit and 64-bit http://www.vmware.com/su...easenotes_ws55.html#553 |
| [deXter] | Nov 18, 2006 | 5.5.2 Build 29772 | 5 out of 5 |
Some of the new technologies that I personally like and I find worth mentioning are: - Enhanced snapshot management - Better USB and other hardware support - Memory page trimming can be disabled to improve performance - Experimental support for Direct3D - Support for 64-bit guest operating systems and various 64 bit hardware - 2-way Virtual SMP - Ability to open and convert Microsoft virtual machines or Symantec LiveState Recovery images One of the exciting aspects of VMware 5.x is the concept of "Appliances". A virtual appliance is a pre-built, pre-configured and ready-to-run software application packaged with the operating system inside a virtual machine. There are plenty appliances available to download, and you don't even need to be a VMware subscriber, one can use the free VMware player to "play" an appliance. This concept has only caught on recently with Microsoft releasing their equivalent with Virtual Hard Disk (VHD). And with multi-core systems becoming more commonplace, the need arises for software that can better utilize the cores. With VMware's VSMP, you'll never complain about under-utilization of resources. |
| DataBitz | Aug 11, 2006 | 5.5.2 Build 29772 | 4 out of 5 |
Awesome product, not much point in getting this over the free Server version now. However the snapshot feature is a lot better in this version. |
| BlueBLocker | Dec 21, 2005 | 5.5.1 Build 19175 | 5 out of 5 |
Real Release Notes for 5.5.1 (build 19175): http://www.vmware.com/su...easenotes_ws55.html#551 |
| Mark Gillespie | Nov 27, 2005 | 5.5 Build 18463 | 5 out of 5 |
Awesome product. VirtualPC is now pretty much dead in the water. I am intrigued WHY the previous reviewer cannot use VMTools to get SVGA, plus he forgets that VMWare has tools for all platforms, which VPC does not. |
| httpd.confused | Nov 26, 2005 | 5.5 Build 18463 | 4 out of 5 |
I use VMware Workstation a great deal for testing, in a variety of environments. I can't believe that it still doesn't support SVGA natively, the way Virtual PC 2004 does. I know that SVGA support is included in VMware tools, but VMware tools can't be installed in all of the environments I use. This limitation forces me to use Virtual PC under some cirtumstances, because VGA isn't always a viable option for me.* It would have also been nice if it didn't revert all of my network settings back to default during the upgrade from version 5.0. (And the fact that 5.0 had to be uninstalled isn't an excuse; the settings could still have been stored and carried over.) * Mark Gillespie: I didn't forget anything. I use a third-party environment that VMtools does not support. I won't say what that environment is (because I get paid to test the software in question), but it doesn't matter anyway--VMtools won't install for it, VMware forces me to use VGA in it, but Virtual PC supports SVGA out of the box. This is not a sweeping statement in favor of Virtual PC; it is just an isolated statement of fact. This is where, typically, someone will say something incredibly stupid like "You can't expect VMtools to support some obscure, custom environment!" To which the obvious answer is: I don't expect it to. I shouldn't need VMtools at all to get SVGA! |
| reumann | Nov 16, 2005 | 5.5 Build 18007 RC | 5 out of 5 |
Hmm.. Where do we use this software? We use VMware to test and repackage new software to be used on our enterprise. This is extremely useful if anyone knows how repackaging works: Always clean and newly formatted pc and continuous snapshots. Additionaly we use VMware GSX Server to consolidate some low profiled servers into one server that has average hardware! That is so useful when isolating roles of some servers that may be under attack... Viva VMware |
| photonboy | Oct 1, 2005 | 5.5 Build 16958 RC | 4 out of 5 |
Hey, I can take an insult, but in case I was misunderstood let me try to clear up my comments concerning the usefulness of VMWare. To Pikawad: I was writing my comment to the masses. If you are able to find amazing uses for this program than good for you. Perhaps you'd like to share your wisdom as to why this program is so wonderful that you can't live without it? As for me, I have talked to many people who misunderstood VMWare's drawbacks concerning hardware compatibility and were very happy to discover dual-boot or how to create a bootable USB drive. I do think it is inappropriate to insult someone who is giving an honest opinion. Slickandy: Regarding my comment on the dual-core CPU. I've studied computers and I know what I'm talking about. A dual-core is simply two CPU's that are joined together using (in AMD's case) something called a System Request Interface and some other components/software. Unfortunately, the software at present rarely takes advantage of the second CPU. In theory the CPU processing power can be almost doubled depending on the software running. In case I wasn't clear, I was hoping that VMWare could be optimised to take advantage of dual-core so that it could primarily take advantage of the second core. For example a Windows XP OS could run using the first core and a Linux OS could run using the second core. To truly take advantage, however, they should be able to each take advantage of the others core when processing becomes intense. It doesn't necessarily have to be written this way and I'm not sure there is a complete concensus as to exactly how the process will work. I don't think multiple operating system support is at the top of the list. I see a tremendous use for dual-core combined with VMWare but I think support on both sides of the fence needs to be much improved to take advantage of this. I have even heard rumours of using dual-core to create two completely separate running OS's which aren't using virtualization at all! Now wouldn't that be even better? Memory addressing, and hardware sharing would be primarily done by a redesign of the motherboard. I hope this clears things up for you. |
| ModderXManiac | Sep 30, 2005 | 5.5 Build 16958 RC | 5 out of 5 |
Amazing program...I just wish Bochs was as easy as this... |
| pikawad | Sep 3, 2005 | 5.5 Build 15576 | 5 out of 5 |
I remember when I used this for the first time. Version 3. I just sat and stared in amazement. I couldn't even get any work done. I was transfixed on this. It was magical. I always wanted to run a computer as a program and now the power was in my hands. I love this program. If my house was burning to the ground this is the only thing besides my cat and my mother I would save. I just can't live without it anymore. I don't see how anybody does. To the guy below that said "If you are very serious about using a second OS then I recommend a dual boot or better yet a USB hard drive if you can get that supported."...I say you have a little brain. Use your imagination a little and you will see uses far beyond that. I use it for more things than you can imagine. In more ways that just for using another os. |
| slickandy | Aug 27, 2005 | 5.5 Build 15576 | 5 out of 5 |
I've used this for years, and have also used VirtualPC in the last couple of years. To be honest, there's little to choose between them I certainly welcome VMware's approach of being able to import the VPC setups. I would say that VMWare is a little more "hard core", is far more configurable than VPC, and has a lot of additional features. However, VPC is cheaper and a lot of people probably don't need all of the extra features VMWare provides. Having said that, VMWare is available for Linux, while VPC isn't. photonboy: I'm think you're a little confused as to exactly what dual core CPUs do, and would not see them replacing virtualisation. paul-white: wtf are you on? Why rate 1* if you've not even bothered to download the prog? Please, grow up. |
| Vantorax | Aug 22, 2005 | 5.5 Build 15576 | 5 out of 5 |
I've been a VMWare user for over 2 years now and it keeps getting better and better! Virtual PC can't even come close to VMWare's extensive snapshot feature. If you're a developer supporting multiple customer sites with their own unique setups, VMWare can make your life a whole lot easier. Same if you often do sales demos of several products. This sort of software will hardly become obsolete as there will always be needs for PORTABLE environments for support, demos, development, etc. I've been through enough cases to see VMWare's full potential. And I too don't get that paul-white who voted 1 simply because he couldn't get an accurate file size to download. |
| photonboy | Aug 22, 2005 | 5.5 Build 15576 | 4 out of 5 |
I have tried various OS's in the linux world as well as Windows XP 32/64 and Vista. It seems to be slightly better than VirtualPC but there is a lot of room for improvement. It's difficult to rate a program like this as it varies in usefulness between OS's and systems. If you are very serious about using a second OS then I recommend a dual boot or better yet a USB hard drive if you can get that supported. That said, it's on it's way to becoming a very useful program but it will be interesting to see if dual-core CPU's (or higher) will be able to run Multiple OS's concurrently in which case this program may end up being obsolete in a few years. |
| Metshrine | Aug 21, 2005 | 5.5 Build 15576 | 5 out of 5 |
Great program, finally we can use some of those virtual pc images at work (as we run both solutions). To the user below, you are rating this a 1 Due to them not posting the file size? You should ASSUME a large download as a program like this usually takes alot of code to run. By the way, it DOES say it on their site, the V5 Program is quoted at "Latest Released Version: 5 | 04/07/05 | 13124 | ~58MB" around 58MB, so you should assume that the beta of 5.5 would be close to that. Dont rate without doing a bit of research first ;-) |
| paul-white | Aug 21, 2005 | 5.5 Build 15576 | 1 out of 5 |
This sounds a very interesting program and could be the answer to some of my problems. Yes, I would love to try Linux and several mother OS's but am reluctant to mess too much with my new PC. But nowhere can I find how big this download is. Betanews gives this program as just 55Kb, yes 55Kb! The VMWare site doesn't say at all. Is it actually 55Mb? If so, I won't bother. A shame, as too little information doesn't help sell a $200 program. |
| war593122 | Aug 20, 2005 | 5.5 Build 15576 | 5 out of 5 |
Sweet, can finally open virutal pc. :) |
| Caleb | Mar 12, 2005 | 5.0 Build 12888 RC3 | 5 out of 5 |
Perfect. :) |
| Ogdenous | Feb 4, 2005 | 5.0 Build 12206 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
Can get serial when you goto vmware.com and register for version 5.0 with a valid email address. |
| oufc_gav | Jan 31, 2005 | 5.0 Build 12206 Beta | 4 out of 5 |
Excellent development of an already good product. When they iron out the beta bugs and optimise the code for final release it will be great. For the people complaining about the lack of a key - go to the VMWare website, sign up officially for the public beta test programme, they send you your own test key. Easy.... For the user that said "then it couldn't tell what speed my computer was because it's a laptop with Intel SPeedstep" - it's BETA software, if you are having problems, report them, that's what beta testing is about. Just slagging off the product like that when it is still in beta stage is stupid. |
| Pipewrench | Jan 21, 2005 | 5.0 Build 11888 Beta | 1 out of 5 |
What garbage. I wasted 25 minutes installing this and then removing this. I own a legal copy of VMware 4.5.2 and I couldn't get a serial number for this. Therefore I could not test any of my old virtual machines with this newer version. It took up almost 2 times the amount of space and then it couldn't tell what speed my computer was because it's a laptop with Intel SPeedstep. I would not recommend this. Every version released since 3.0 is more bloated and works less good. I'm going over to Microsoft VirtualPC 2004. To sum up: JUNK! |
| mizkitty | Jan 14, 2005 | 5.0 Build 11888 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
Can't wait for the final release. I love the fact that they finally added the ability to save multiple snapshots. |
| acascianelli | Jan 14, 2005 | 5.0 Build 11888 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
very exciting features coming in this release. im still waiting for the final version before i use this for any critical applications. |
| war593122 | Jan 2, 2005 | 5.0 Build 11608 Beta | 1 out of 5 |
I find it pretty stupid they do not provide a beta serial because its pretty much useless as you cant even run the virtual PC with a serial. :( |
| kmleow | Dec 11, 2004 | 5.0 Beta Build 10738 | 4 out of 5 |
Good software but pricey and does not support Direct3D |
| krispyk | Dec 9, 2004 | 5.0 Beta Build 10737 | 5 out of 5 |
As always, VMware just continues to impress :) A forum thread discussing the changes and new features is available at http://www.vmware.com/co...p;messageID=86089#86089 |
| mxxcon | Dec 8, 2004 | 5.0 Beta Build 10737 | 5 out of 5 |
getting better with every release. however to convert VirtualPC image to VMWare image you need to download "V2V Conversion Wizard". but i can't seem to find it anywhere.. :( |
| veeoh | Oct 10, 2003 | 4.0.5.6030 | 5 out of 5 |
absolutley invaluable for me :D |
| Perezoso | Aug 15, 2003 | 4.0.1 Build 5289 | 5 out of 5 |
Simply A M A Z I N G |
| PostCode | Mar 3, 2003 | 4.0 Beta Build 4183 | 5 out of 5 |
Simply the best. Been using VMWare since version 2. Run it on a Linux based system, using it to run Windows primarily for customer support. Easy enough to simply pop into a suspended session and troubleshoot it from there as well as cut down on having additional systems around to use. The best program out there, hands down. |
| BlackB1rd | Feb 28, 2003 | 4.0 Beta Build 4121 | 5 out of 5 |
I have to say: good job! This new beta has some really neat features, especially the new drag & drop between host and guest feature! This works very smooth, extremely handy! I am impressed and it's just a beta! :D |
| fluke75 | Sep 11, 2002 | 3.2 Beta Build 2230 | 4 out of 5 |
The program is an excellent idea (running different operating systems without multi-boot). It works flawlessly on Windows 2000 and XP, but people complain about how it works in Win 98 and ME. I ran the program with XP as the host OS and Linux, Windows 98 and Windows 2000 Pro as guest OS. The virtual stuff like device drivers went on my nerves though, especially the driver for my DVD player and the display driver. Installation of apps on guest operating systems was a pain in the a** having in mind that my DVD player could recognize one out of 5 of my CD's which were burnt in Nero and Win XP Roxio plug-in. This program I only see as a way to isolate software that does not work well on the host OS, and is not too proccessor intensive scince VMware uses a lot of host memory when it's working. Networking is also excellent and there are nice ways to cover your tracks if you do not want peole to look where you surfed the night before. Just password protect your Win 2k and off you go. But multi-boot is still the way to go for me. You get fully functional systems with good drivers and some real speed, unlike the sluggish ones in VMware. I like VMware, but I will stick to multi-boot for now. Very stable program. |
| eliminat | Mar 29, 2002 | 3.1 Beta Build 1746 | 5 out of 5 |
supports everything it claims to support as long as you're wise enough to read the documentation and follow the directions. Biggest problem I've had with it is that the Authorization Service occasionally decided to eat up 100% of my CPU. Still figuring that one out, but it supports the OS's, USB, etc that it claims. |
| brokengoten | Mar 27, 2002 | 3.1 Beta Build 1746 | 5 out of 5 |
This Proggy is the best I use it at work and at home lukewayne : did you reboot?? |
| lukewayne | Oct 28, 2001 | 3.0 RC Build 1447 | 3 out of 5 |
im having a problem starting this program when i start vmware workstation i get a box that says "the vmware authorization service is not running" ???? any suggestions as to what is wrong? the install went fine |
| Randall | Oct 27, 2001 | 3.0 RC Build 1447 | 4 out of 5 |
nice prog, if you wan´t run multiple os in 9x base system try Connectix Virtual PC.. |
| Black-Wolf | May 24, 2001 | 2.0.4 | 5 out of 5 |
Excellent program!! A++++++++++++ |
| daztop | May 24, 2001 | 2.0.4 | 5 out of 5 |
As an additional note - this version now also allows the use of Windows XP as a VM. |
| PGHammer | Nov 10, 2000 | 2.0.3 | 5 out of 5 |
The way Be is designed, you are required to boot from a floppy (bad news). However, you can run any other OS as a guest OS (limiting factors are RAM and hard drive space). 95, 98, SE, ME, 2K (in multiple flavors), NT 4, even DOS (if that floats your boat) along with darn near every Linux (or UNIX) distro on the planet. |
| viperloader | Nov 8, 2000 | 2.0.3 | 5 out of 5 |
I use VMWare for Linux (running on an Mandrake 7.1 base OS) to run between 4 and 6 Guest OS's constantly with no problems. The guest OS complement is Win9X, WinME, NT4 Server and Workstation and Win2K Pro/Server. The most important thing to set is the memory for the guest OS - at least 64 MB per guest, and reserve 128 MB for the base OS. I have a Dell P3-550 with 512 MB of RAM and have had no problems - and Yes, USB is supported, so long as your base OS supports it. |
| purplemonkeydan | Oct 24, 2000 | 2.0.3 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
Very nice program. Although it would be nice if they made a 9x/Me compatible version. |
| collinsdonald | Oct 24, 2000 | 2.0.3 Beta | 5 out of 5 |
This program rocks, works perfect under w2k. ZilverZtream obviuslly didnt read vmwares instructions for installing redhat, Since it took 1hr59min. You need to install redhat in text mode instead of graphic mode and it works very smooth and much faster. |
| stikle | Aug 2, 2000 | 2.0.2 | 5 out of 5 |
VMWare is a GREAT program. We use it here at work for development purposes. I just installed 10 different variations of Win95/Win98/WinME/WinNT in VMs, then copied those to a SAN for archival. Now we can load up one of those configs, install our apps and do testing. Even if we have a complete meltdown, no big deal. Nuke the VM folder, recopy from the SAN and start over. GREAT product. Oh yeah...Does not support USB? I beg to differ. I -ONLY- have a USB MS Mouse on this system, and all of the above OSs installed in a VM with USB support just fine. My host OS is W2K, FYI. |
| Winston | Aug 2, 2000 | 2.0.2 | 5 out of 5 |
Nice non-bloated cpu cooler/monitor. Definitely gets the job done. Works fine in Me too. |
| AlaUser | Jul 22, 2000 | 2.0.2 RC | 5 out of 5 |
Anybody who has to develop Windows installation scripts should get this program! Set up your target environments in virtual machines, take copies of the virgin environments, and it becomes simple to go through a cycle of testing installation scripts, since getting back to a known configuration is merely a matter of copying a file. It's faster than restoring from DriveImage, and you can do it right on your development box. |
| grasshopper | Jun 20, 2000 | 2.01 Build 570 | 5 out of 5 |
Where does it say "freeware" ? It does say "shareware" which means you have to pay for it after a trial period, maybe you're confusing the two terms... I tried an early V2 beta version and it worked great ! RH6.0 installed in under 10 minutes, if yours took 2 hours then you've got some prob with your PC, it's not the VMware prog that's the prob... |
| ZilverZtream | Jun 20, 2000 | 2.01 Build 570 | 3 out of 5 |
First of all, it's a great concept. But I couldn't get the "freeware part" since there's a 30 day tryout? Well well. I'm on a PIII 500Mhz 198Mb RAM and I installed RedHat Linux 6.2 (that I already have installed on a "real" partition" When installing RH6.2 on a partition it takes 7min on my computer, pretty slick, but, installing RedHat 6.2 on a virtual partition takes a little bit longer, approx 1hr 59min, and that's a HUGE difference. While in the program RedHat start screaming about the IRQ ports already in use (by Win2K) so ofcourse you can't get to X (KDE/Gnome or whatever). I guess you need to install the extras that comes with VMware to get X to work. I guess you could set the RAM usage of VMware to 80% during installation of an OS and set priority HIGH in Win2K for VMware. Well, there's still alot of unfinished sections in VMware that should be fixed before they release a new version, and atlast, please don't call VMware a FREEWARE. |
| Hornet | Jun 13, 2000 | 2.0.1 build 557 | 5 out of 5 |
Pro Allow user to run different OS without rebooting or dual boot. Con Require a lot of RAM Do not support USB |
| theonegod | Mar 9, 2000 | 2.0 | 5 out of 5 |
Great program. I run 2000 as the Host OS and run 98, NT4, FreeBSD, and Linux in Virtual Machines at the same time (got alotta RAM) It is great! |
| jay_bird | Mar 4, 2000 | Build 475 Release Candidate 2 | 5 out of 5 |
Excellent program. However I've only used it on Win2k w/ Win98. Everything works great. And the above review may be misleading...I've had no trouble using my USB devices in VMware. It may be different in other OS's though. |
| ptaylor874 | Feb 23, 2000 | 2.0 Build 468 Release Candidate 1 | 5 out of 5 |
This is an excellent product for software development. I'm using it to have seperate installations of different versions of the same Development system . (I have products I'm selling that I made with the old version, and I'm working on new products with the new one - The Dev system has a few problems that aren't in the old version) I would recommend this to anyone doing any serious programming. If you are just an average user, you probably wouldn't have a great need for this product. Also, I think the new version of BeOS (5) may work with VMWare because of the new installation methods. (But it won't be supported officially, I'm fairly sure) |
| krazydog | Feb 23, 2000 | 2.0 Build 468 Release Candidate 1 | 2 out of 5 |
Great... I can run other operating systems easily. Now why would I do that? Because NT/2000 has bad hardware support and everyone wants BeOS. Only problem is that VMware doesn't support USB or BeOS, etc. Pretty much makes this useless. Come back when you're ready to give us USEFUL functionality. |
