[Osmium]

Somebody asked in another thread about Yosemite's new Hypervisor:

"Hypervisor (Hypervisor.framework). The Hypervisor framework allows virtualization vendors to build virtualization solutions on top of OS X without needing to deploy third-party kernel extensions (KEXTs). Included is a lightweight hypervisor that enables virtualization of the host CPUs."

Any news on if anyone is actually using this yet? Stability matters a lot more to me than raw performance in VMs, so I'd be very keen to know if Parallels/Fusion/VirtualBox have adopted this--assuming that it would actually improve stability or, if not, what the pros/cons are for using Apple's own Hypervisor over a third party's.

https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/mac/releaseno...

[jsz0]

Not many details on this yet but there shouldn't be any major drawbacks since third party kexts can still be used to support legacy / multi-platform VMs or supplement Hypervisor.kext in other ways. I doubt Apple would have bothered doing this unless they had a mountain of OSX crash logs / power consumption data that suggested they could do better. It's clearly in their best interest to sell stable computers that get great battery life so I expect they will do a good job here. Users don't switch between VM platforms often enough to know which one offers the best stability / power efficiency so there's less of an incentive for companies like VMWare or Parallels to make them a top priority.

[stephenr]

I would love to see a basic solution built on this - my major use case is headless Debian machines so the constant development of windows features in parallels and VMware are pretty pointless for me.

I would guess this is a way to allow a VM app to be distributed via the existing App Store rules