Re:Vagrant 1.1, VMware Fusion
by bradchoate on Thursday March 14, 2013 @01:25PM
(#5376367)
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.
[ Parent
| 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.
Re:Vagrant 1.1, VMware Fusion
by bradleyland on Thursday March 14, 2013 @02:42PM
(#5376862)
But the alternatives aren't Vagrant + Fusion versus VMWare on Windows. The alternatives are Vagrant + VirtualBox versus Vagrant + VirtualBox, which is zero cost.
Re:Vagrant 1.1, VMware Fusion
by darkarmani on Friday March 15, 2013 @03:39PM
(#5382529)
I thought that price included VM Fusion -- as in for $30 more you get the provider also.
Re:Vagrant 1.1, VMware Fusion
by stock_toaster on Friday March 15, 2013 @03:28AM
(#5379554)
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".