VMWare, Parallels release new virtualization betas for Mac

[AppleInsider]

VMware and Parallels, two software developers set to duel it out for a share of the Mac virtualization market, have recently released new betas of products that let users of Intel Macs run Microsoft's Windows operating system alongside Mac OS X.

Parallels was first to market with its solution dubbed Parallels Desktop, which made its debut earlier this year to much fanfare. The $80 virtualization software has been the recipient of many favorable reviews and adopted a strong following from users who want to run both the Mac OS X and Windows simultaneously on their new Intel Macs.

Parallels Desktop is largely considered by Intel Mac users to be a more capable alternative to Apple's Boot Camp software because it does not require users to reboot their Macs in order to switch between operating system.

For its part, Apple has also openly praised the advantages offered by Parallels, plugging the software in versions of its "Get a Mac" television advertising campaign and carrying copies for sale at its international retail chain.

Though there has been ongoing industry discussion that Apple would eventually morph its Boot Camp software into its own virtualization solution that would rival Parallels, company executives have stated at least twice that it has no plans to do so.

The most recent comment on the matter came from Apple Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer, who recently reiterated in a sit-down meeting with Bear Stearns analyst Andy Neff that the company will not enter the embedded virtualization market.

"Apple indicated that it is very pleased with Parallels software and didn't feel the need to compete with its own version of embedded virtualization," Neff wrote in a note to his clients following the meeting.

Parallels Desktop Beta 2

In a public "Beta 2" release of Parallels Desktop this week, the Renton, Wash.-based software developer rolled out a plethora of new features that were previously detailed in a Dec. 1 AppleInsider report, including tight integration with Boot Camp partitions. The release also adds a new user interface, USB 2.0 support, an improved coherence mode and the ability to burn optical discs under Windows.

VMware joins the party with Fusion

At the same time, Parallels is bracing itself for some stiff competition from VMware, which on Friday released the first public beta of a competing virtualization product carrying the "Fusion" moniker.

"Fusion is the codename for a new VMware desktop product for Mac that will enable Intel-based Macs to run x86 operating systems, such as Windows and Linux, in virtual machines at the same time as Mac OS X," the company told testers in an email announcing the public beta program. "It is built on VMware's robust and advanced desktop virtualization platform that is used by over four million users today."

VMware said Fusion can run any of the over 360 virtual appliances available at its Virtual Appliance Marketplace. The pre-built and pre-configured applications come bundled with an operating system so they can run on any hardware or operating system, the company said. Some of the appliances featured on its marketplace are Astaro Security Gateway, B-hive Transaction Visibility Manager, Proofpoint Messaging Security Gateway, Loadbalancer, and SpamTitan.

Similar to Parallels Desktop, initial features of Fusion include USB 2.0 support, drag-and-drop of files and folders between Mac OS X and Windows, and support for all Intel Mac hardware -- including the new 64-bit Mac Pro and iMac. However, Fusion offers a distinct capability in allowing users to designate multiple virtual processors in order to leverage the dual-core Core Duo chips available in the latest Intel Macs.

Where to get the goods

VMware's Fusion beta along with documentation (PDF) and an FAQ are available from the company's website. Similarly, information on the latest beta of Parallels Desktop is also available from the Parallels website.[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2325)

[domerdel]

How come we never hear about products like CrossOver in AI articles?
http://www.codeweavers.com/products/

Perhaps it's because I'm not just the average user, but I would almost think this is bigger than BootCamp and/or any virtualization software.

[markw10]

I use Parallels but have been interested in upgrading to Beta 2. I had a hard time choosing between Boot Camp and Parallels but chose Parallels since I like running Windows side by side with OS X. The only downside is I have two games I'd like to play which won't work under Parallels and I have always wanted to install Boot Camp too but don't want to waste hard drive space on both so seems that issue has been fixed now that it is integrated with Boot Camp.
My question, since I already have Parallels does that mean I have to completely reinstall Parallels to make a Boot Camp windows partition or can I convert my current parallels virtual windows drive to boot camp?

[Matthew Yohe]

I use Parallels but have been interested in upgrading to Beta 2. I had a hard time choosing between Boot Camp and Parallels but chose Parallels since I like running Windows side by side with OS X. The only downside is I have two games I'd like to play which won't work under Parallels and I have always wanted to install Boot Camp too but don't want to waste hard drive space on both so seems that issue has been fixed now that it is integrated with Boot Camp.
My question, since I already have Parallels does that mean I have to completely reinstall Parallels to make a Boot Camp windows partition or can I convert my current parallels virtual windows drive to boot camp?



I don't know how the current version works, but I was able to accomplish this simply by installing bootcamp'ed XP and telling parallels to use that directory as the system volume... basically having boot camp and parallels use the same directory for XP.

[Craigb6]

Shouldn't it be 'duel' not 'dual'?

[Matthew Yohe]

AI needs a copy-editor staffed full-time.

[macintel4me]

AI needs a copy-editor staffed full-time.

I was just thinking the same thing. BTW, it's "Friday" not "friday".

[Archstudent]

Shouldn't it be 'duel' not 'dual'?

no. it shouldn't.

dual= 2 at once
duel = fight at dawn ;P

-----------------------
**MY BAD**
yes it should be duel.. heh just assumed they were talking about "dual" booting..well it shouldn't really even be duel because "duel it out" doesn't really scan

[syklee26]

come on you nerds, the point is you understood what the writer said. this is not Writings 101 in college. AI's job is to give us some "inside" information on upcoming Apple products and etc. AI's job is not get an A+ on grammar and spelling.

[m01ety]

How come we never hear about products like CrossOver in AI articles?
http://www.codeweavers.com/products/

Perhaps it's because I'm not just the average user, but I would almost think this is bigger than BootCamp and/or any virtualization software.

You're kidding, right? Why would it be bigger? It hardly ever works, and is an utter pain to use, configure and maintain. Parallels with Coherence is dramatically better. It already killed Codeweavers -- they might not get that yet -- but once they add video acceleration, they'll be deader than dead. Seriously, Codeweavers is a toy to make delusional WINE/Linux/OSS fanboys happy. It'll never be more.

[Mr. H]

duel = fight at dawn ;P

Exactly, that's the whole point. The word in the article should be "duel". The article is referring to the fact that these two solutions will be "fighting it out" in the "virtualisation on OS X" market.

Edit: Archstudent's post updated as I was replying.

[SpamSandwich]

come on you nerds, the point is you understood what the writer said. this is not Writings 101 in college. AI's job is to give us some "inside" information on upcoming Apple products and etc. AI's job is not get an A+ on grammar and spelling.

"...Writings 101...", "...job is not get...".

Oh, dear.

[psilopsyche]

Do any of you guys think that Apple may in fact integrate its own virtualization of Windows in Leopard contrary to their statements saying otherwise? I'm thinking that this may in fact happen. I don't have any knowledge of the $ pros/cons of doing so, but in theory I figure that it would be a HUGE feature that would lure a larger number of switchers. Do you guys agree/disagree? Clearly they would deny a Boot Camp virtualization feature if they had that in store as a marketing plan. They couldn't just say, "Oh yeah, it's going to be that 'One more thing' we were talking about. You'll be able to run Windows at the same time as you run our superior operation system. Look out Microsoft!" Right?

[domerdel]

You're kidding, right? Why would it be bigger? It hardly ever works, and is an utter pain to use, configure and maintain. Parallels with Coherence is dramatically better. It already killed Codeweavers -- they might not get that yet -- but once they add video acceleration, they'll be deader than dead. Seriously, Codeweavers is a toy to make delusional WINE/Linux/OSS fanboys happy. It'll never be more.

You may be right, but codeweaver's initial concept of having windows app without an OS should be an influence to others. From a stepping stone standpoint, something like this is much bigger. It's totally subjective though.

[lseven]

You may be right, but codeweaver's initial concept of having windows app without an OS should be an influence to others. From a stepping stone standpoint, something like this is much bigger. It's totally subjective though.

Anyone can come up with a concept. I have a concept to run Mac apps on a PC or cell phone without buying Mac hardware or an OS. Also it doesn't even require an install! Implementation is another thing, however.

The fact that they are talking about actually charging money for a product like Codeweavers (which rarely works) doesn't help, either.

[domerdel]

Anyone can come up with a concept. I have a concept to run Mac apps on a PC or cell phone without buying Mac hardware or an OS. Also it doesn't even require an install! Implementation is another thing, however.

The fact that they are talking about actually charging money for a product like Codeweavers (which rarely works) doesn't help, either.

Wow, you took that pretty literal, you sure you're not a PC user? :lol:

It's funny to hear you interpret "concepts". I will admit this whole virtualization, and rebooting to get into another OS, is a great "transition". I think this whole BootCamp thing is a great experiment... but lacking from the multitasker perspective. It may be years to come, but you'll look back and laugh, "Can you believe we had to reboot, just to get to a certain application, and then reboot again to resume our native operating machine?"

Google Keyword search: "Big Picture". try it sometime :)

[quinney]

Exactly, that's the whole point. The word in the article should be "duel". The article is referring to the fact that these two solutions will be "fighting it out" in the "virtualisation on OS X" market.


If I had written it, I would be claiming that it was meant as a clever pun.
(two solutions for running two OS's fighting... dual/duel....get it?)

[quinney]

Wow, you took that pretty literal, you sure you're not a PC user? :lol:

It's funny to hear you interpret "concepts". I will admit this whole virtualization, and rebooting to get into another OS, is a great "transition". I think this whole BootCamp thing is a great experiment... but lacking from the multitasker perspective. It may be years to come, but you'll look back and laugh, "Can you believe we had to reboot, just to get to a certain application, and then reboot again to resume our native operating machine?"

Google Keyword search: "Big Picture". try it sometime :)

I'm with you domerdel.

Whenever you hear anyone explain why they want Windows as well as MacOS, they
mostly say it is to enable them to run specific application(s). Not many Mac users
want to run Windows just for the enjoyment of running the OS. The approach of
wrapping an application in a "bottle" to run within an OS for which it was not
coded is another way, besides virtualization, of accomplishing the objective. It
has the appealing advantage of not requiring people to financially support MSFT.

If I were going to wish for AAPL to acquire any intellectual property to allow the
running of Windows apps under Mac OS, I would rather they pursue this design
approach than virtualization.

[aplnub]

Let's get to the point here people.

Who is using Fusion right now? I am d/l'ing the beta as we speak for my 24" iMac.

[sunilraman]

"...Writings 101...", "...job is not get...". ...Oh, dear.

Ha ha :lol: :D

[sunilraman]

Let's get to the point here people. Who is using Fusion right now? I am d/l'ing the beta as we speak for my 24" iMac.

I just got a newsletter from VMWare inviting me to the PC version of their latest Beta:

"We are pleased to invite you to the VMware Workstation 6.0 Beta Program. Workstation 6.0 includes exciting new features, including:

* Support for Windows Vista - Use Windows Vista as host operating system

* Multiple monitor display - You can configure a VM to span multiple monitors, or multiple VMs to each display on separate monitors.

* Integrated Virtual Debugger - Workstation integrates with Visual Studio and Eclipse so you can deploy, run, and debug programs in a VM directly from your preferred IDE

* Automation APIs (VIX API 2.0) - You can write scripts and programs to automate VM testing.

* Headless mode - You can run VMs in the background without the Workstation UI "

[aplnub]

Fusion is loading XP Home.

All good so far.


PS The new Beta for Parallels caused a Kernal Panic but when I restarted it ran fine and faster than the first Beta. USB 2.0 support is a plus.

[sunilraman]

Fusion is loading XP Home.

All good so far.

PS The new Beta for Parallels caused a Kernal Panic but when I restarted it ran fine and faster than the first Beta. USB 2.0 support is a plus.

Kernel. :D

[Cam'ron]

I downloaded the beta for Fusion. It runs ok so far, there are many settings not yet introduced that will be in future releases. But, for actually using Windows (or Linux) it has run just fine. It was a little choppy, but I have only used it twice. Since I use VMWare for school, this is a very nice solution for me to not have to be booted into Windows all the time. Now I only have to deal with the headaches of Windows in virtual land, not both.

For those wondering why run boot camp; one answer is for school. My program is a "laptop program" and Windows is required for some things (Fusion can take care of most of those). One thing it can't take care of is this horrible program I have to run called Secure Exam (obviously for doing exams). The purpose of it is to shut down any other running apps and be a fixed window so you cannot cheat. The problem is that it can recognize a virtual environment, meaning I can't use VMWare for it (I do realize that is the point). I love how half the time when I close out of Secure Exam it also give me a BSOD or just crashes for a bit.

I think the great thing about Parallels is the ability to point it to a Boot Camp drive. That can end up saving a lot of HDD space. I hope Fusion implements this in the future.

[aplnub]

VMWARE is not choppy by any means on my 24" iMac 2.33 3 GB ram. In fact, it is as fast as Parallels Beta 2.

We have a real race for virtualzation about to take place. Watch out Parallels, VMWare is kicking it, and fast.

VMWare Pro's: No KernEl panics so far (that is for you Sunil), Cd isntallation and recoginition was automatic
Con's: Still in Beta

Parallels Pro's: Proven performance for me
Con's: Kernel Panics when updating to the next release, Installations sometimes are a pain because Parallels won't install Windows and act like it cannot see the install CD

[sunilraman]

...on my 24" iMac 2.33 3 GB ram...

:wow: *keyboard starts sparking due to my droooling*

Watch out Parallels, VMWare is kicking it, and fast.

<mr.burns>Exxxxcellent....</mr.burns>

No KernEl panics so far (that is for you Sunil)

Heh. :D

[mjtomlin]

This is a much better route for anyone that doesn't want to invest in a copy of Windows. As a web design hobbyist I sometimes like to see what my pages look like in IE on a windows machine ... Crossover works great for that. I downloaded and installed IE 6 for Win 98 directly onto my Mac, no Windows needed. It works fine.

As I've stated on other boards. A product like Crossover / WINE removes any dependencies on Microsoft products. I would LOVE to see Apple's support behind this project and hoping it is one of the secret features in Leopard.

Mac hardware ... choice of three operating systems; OS X, Windows, Linux
OS X ... run Mac, Linux and legacy Windows applications.

[sunilraman]

...I downloaded and installed IE 6 for Win 98 directly onto my Mac, no Windows needed...

...A product like Crossover / WINE removes any dependencies on Microsoft products...

:D :D :D Last time I checked IE was a Microsoft product :D :D :D

[yama]

Sweet!

I use VMWare extensively at work for setting up test environments and the like. I'd love to give this beta a shot... Too bad I don't have an Intel Mac to test it on :lol:

For anyone who does work in tech support for stuff like databases and web servers, VMWare is a life saver for testing. For a start, it means I can have 20 different OS/server/database configurations on a single machine without having to mess around with booting from separate partitions. Before we got VMWare I had a box which booted into 3 different versions of Windows. Ugh! What a mess that was.

The other really awesome thing about VMWare is non-persistent hard drives. I can set an image to be non-persistent, which means any changes I made to it will be lost as soon as I switch off the VM. Great for testing hotfixes, bugs, or when I need to reproduce a problem that breaks the database.

The VMWare Workstation looks like it's going to be quite a bit more expensive than Parallels. But I expect VMWare to be used by businesses and Parallels to be used by home users. Hopefully they'll also port the free VMWare player to the Mac.

[Chucker]

:D :D :D Last time I checked IE was a Microsoft product :D :D :D

Pwned :D

[iMick]

I dl'd VMware Fusion, after registering, but when I install it, it's asking for a serial number. I don't remember getting one. Where did you folks get yours?

[aplnub]

I dl'd VMware Fusion, after registering, but when I install it, it's asking for a serial number. I don't remember getting one. Where did you folks get yours?

You are given a serial number on the last page where you download. It was in red. They didn't email to me so you had to print the page or PDF it to your HDD for later use.

Man, VMWare is kicking tail. I imagine it will be more polished when it goes up for sale and I have to say, I may kick Parallels to the curb if they do what they do with everything else.

[iMick]

You are given a serial number on the last page where you download. It was in red. They didn't email to me so you had to print the page or PDF it to your HDD for later use.

Man, VMWare is kicking tail. I imagine it will be more polished when it goes up for sale and I have to say, I may kick Parallels to the curb if they do what they do with everything else.

Thanks. I'll just re-register, then try it again!

[mynameisjesse]

This is a much better route for anyone that doesn't want to invest in a copy of Windows. As a web design hobbyist I sometimes like to see what my pages look like in IE on a windows machine ... Crossover works great for that. I downloaded and installed IE 6 for Win 98 directly onto my Mac, no Windows needed. It works fine.

As I've stated on other boards. A product like Crossover / WINE removes any dependencies on Microsoft products. I would LOVE to see Apple's support behind this project and hoping it is one of the secret features in Leopard.

Mac hardware ... choice of three operating systems; OS X, Windows, Linux
OS X ... run Mac, Linux and legacy Windows applications.

I'm not sure what type of web designer you are, but I know I thought it'd be a good idea until I actually tried it. The font rendering is CRAP. It does you absoutely NO good to see how it looks in IE running in WINE.

[cool11]

Two questions:

1. which one seems to have more features and work better?
2. everytime I will want to upgrade parallels, what do I have to do? What about the whole installation I did? Applications, windows setting etc remain unchanged? Or do I have to setup everything from scratch in order to use the newest version of parallels? Just overwrite the parallel application and everything else stay the same? (excuse me for the 'silly' question, I am new to macs)

[Mr. H]

I'm not sure what type of web designer you are, but I know I thought it'd be a good idea until I actually tried it. The font rendering is CRAP. It does you absoutely NO good to see how it looks in IE running in WINE.

That's a very good point, not something I'd considered before. IE presumably uses Windows APIs to do some of the rendering. Since WINE/Crossover is a third-party implementation of the windows API, things won't necessarily look exactly as they would running under Windows.

[Mr. H]

Two questions:

1. which one seems to have more features and work better?

At the moment, I think the best solution for the average consumer that wants to run one copy of Windows and OS X on one machine, Parallels is the better option (once this latest version that integrates with Boot Camp is out of beta).

For system admins, I think VMware is probably the better option; it seems to have many features aimed at that area.

I'm not sure how prices will compare.

[iMick]

Is anyone else's Fusion running jerky? My mouse movements are not fluid at all and is very annoying. Parallels works fine though.

[djpadz]

1. which one seems to have more features and work better?


Depends on what you're doing. If you're looking to run Windows, because you need to run some application or another for work, then I think that Parallels, especially with Coherence, makes a very compelling case. If you're looking for a breadth of OS support, especially in the UNIX realm, like Solaris x86, then I might be a bit more compelled toward VMWare, only because of the target markets for each.

IMHO, Parallels is geared more toward desktop users, generally running Windows, but perhaps running one variant of Linux or another. VMWare is more of a "kitchen sink" solution, doing everything reasonably well, but not really exceling in any one area.

Also, VMWare tends to be more popular as an enterprise solution, so there can be some benefits to being able to easily (I know, there are tools that allow conversion, but it's still an extra step) move VMs between environments.

I haven't installed the VMWare product on my own Mac yet, although I have been running it under Linux for some time. IMHO, VMWare's disk I/O can be a bit sluggish, but having not installed it on a Mac yet, I can't really do any kind of side-by-side comparison.


2. everytime I will want to upgrade parallels, what do I have to do? What about the whole installation I did? Applications, windows setting etc remain unchanged? Or do I have to setup everything from scratch in order to use the newest version of parallels? Just overwrite the parallel application and everything else stay the same? (excuse me for the 'silly' question, I am new to macs)

Not a silly question, but, fortunately, the answer is that for which you'd hoped. In either application, upgrading generally involves two steps:

Upgrade the application itself. This is generally a matter of just running the installer.
Upgrade the OS-specific tools on the guest OS. Under Windows, this is just a matter of selecting "Install tools" (or something like that) from the application menu. That will mount the CD Image that has the tools, and run the installer. The whole process takes about a minute, plus a reboot.

Any upgrades that will need to be done to your guest OS images will be done automatically. You will not need to re-install anything in the guest OS. It is important however, that when upgrading a VM application like Parallels or VMWare that you read the release notes for the specific upgrade steps for that version! A lot of problems can be caused if you don't follow those directions exactly, as some people who are running Parallels with their Boot Camp partitions have found.

In short, product upgrades are very easy, regardless of whether you're running VMWare or Parallels.

Having said all of that, I installed Beta 2 of Parallels yesterday, once their website came back up, and it's not bad, but it is a little less stable than Beta 1. It's crashed a couple of times on me so far. Being able to run command windows in Coherence mode is nice, but I'm finding that there are still a few instances where I have to run in a window, in order to see certain things. The most annoying is PuTTY's session window. The terminal window works fine, but the session window seems to suffer the same issue as command windows did in Beta 1.

If your need for Parallels is critical, then I might hold off from installing Beta 2, unless the new feature set looks really compelling. If, however, you can live with an occasional crash here or there, it's certainly useable.

[Marvin]

Is anyone else's Fusion running jerky? My mouse movements are not fluid at all and is very annoying. Parallels works fine though.

Same here. I was just testing it out and have since deleted it since I use Bootcamp'd Windows. It seemed to be slower than Parallels but OS X seemed to run better when switching between the VM. Parallels was quite choppy doing this.

[GregAlexander]

How come we never hear about products like CrossOver in AI articles? <snip> I would almost think this is bigger than BootCamp and/or any virtualization software.
If it worked well, it would be bigger than virtualisation - unfortunately there is a much smaller list of apps that work. And when you start looking at things like an app integrating with windows email, I'm going to assume the chance of getting it working well is very low.

Anyway, all my brother has to run in Windows is one app that his work gives him to download flight timetables. Maybe it would work, maybe it wouldn't.

All my mother has to run in Windows is MS-Money & ACT. But neither is listed as working on the [b]WINE[b] website.

A product like Crossover / WINE removes any dependencies on Microsoft products. I would LOVE to see Apple's support behind this project and hoping it is one of the secret features in Leopard.Wordperfect (I think) had an interesting use for WINE. They used it in their source code so they could have a wordperfect-for-Linux version using their Windows code. I'd like Apple to do something similar - help Windows developers port their Win32 code to Xcode by integrating WINE into Xcode. That'd be kinda interesting.

Do any of you guys think that Apple may in fact integrate its own virtualization of Windows in Leopard contrary to their statements saying otherwise?If Apple owned Parallels, MS might sue them for importing old PC setups (since the OEM license says it can't be moved to another compute), or sue for allowing conversion of VirtualPC disks to Parallels (for the same reason). It might be more effective for Apple to use bootcamp and even sell Windows with their Macs.

They could, of course, do a cheap bundling deal with Parallels without any of the above problems. And it would fit their statement of Apple not building a virtualisation solution. (this would anger VMWare!)

[GregAlexander]

which <virtualisation product> seems to have more features and work better?I'm not sure which works better. VMWare is still in beta anyway.

As far as features go... they seem very similar. The only differences I know of are
1) VMWare allows you to use multiple cores (parallels only uses 1!)
2) Parallels allows you to have a single interface combining Windows & OSX.
3) Parallels lets you use the same Windows install for Bootcamp and virtualisation.

I'd like to know whether either is better for tasks like
- sharing a bluetooth modem connection.
- printing from Windows using OSX printers (ie: not separately configured)
- integrating Windows mail with OSX mail (I do this with IMAP now... good as long as I'm online).

[iMick]

Same here. I was just testing it out and have since deleted it since I use Bootcamp'd Windows. It seemed to be slower than Parallels but OS X seemed to run better when switching between the VM. Parallels was quite choppy doing this.

That's odd. My Parallels works just fine. I deleted Boot Camp because I didn't really need to boot out to use the one Windows program that I use.

[Chucker]

All my mother has to run in Windows is MS-Money & ACT. But neither is listed as working on the Parallels website.

They should work just fine. Apps typically work, unless they require some special hardware, or 3D graphics acceleration.

Wordperfect (I think) had an interesting use for WINE. They used it in their source code so they could have a wordperfect-for-Linux version using their Windows code. I'd like Apple to do something similar - help Windows developers port their Win32 code to Xcode by integrating WINE into Xcode. That'd be kinda interesting.

It would also be awful, just like Corel's Linux "ports" were awful. If you're going to throw junk like that at people, you shouldn't be surprised if the responses are equally demeaning.

[aplnub]

How much ram do you guys have?

I have 3 GB and can run Parallels and Fusion at the same time with both set on 256 MB ram a piece.

[iMick]

How much ram do you guys have?

I have 3 GB and can run Parallels and Fusion at the same time with both set on 256 MB ram a piece.

I just have 1GB on my C2D 20" iMac. My CD MacBook only has 512MB, but I really don't use any virtualization software on that one, yet. Maybe I need 2GB in my iMac?

[GregAlexander]

They should work just fine. Apps typically work, unless they require some special hardware, or 3D graphics acceleration.Sorry, I was responding about WINE and said parallels instead. oops.
I meant that MS Money & ACT aren't listed as running on the WINE website.

In fact, MS Money, ACT, MS Office all work fine in Parallels. The only problem my mother has is the same one my father has with VirtualPC on his Powerbook. The problem is that when Windows is stuffing up I tell her to restart Windows. What she DOES is she closes parallels and restarts the Mac - but she never actually restarts Windows (since Parallels just suspends the virtual machine).

[digitalclips]

Someone asked this at the start of the thread and didn't get an clear answer. I suspect I know the answer but just checking.

If Parallels is up and running but no Boot Camp, can the two be linked now, i.e. install Boot Camp and use existing Parallel's area. The answer that was given assumed Boot Camp came first not Parallels. I can see how a new Parallels installation can simply be pointed to Boot Camp's Windows area but I think the questioner and certainly this is my question, what about installing Boot Camp and pointing it to use the current Parallel's installation? I don't see this working.

I wonder if a Boot Camp area can be set up and somehow the current Parallel's data can be moved there using Finder and then Parallel's set up as if new to utilize this data? I am just hoping to find a way to avoid hours of updating Windows again after initial installation.

In the old VPC days it was amazing how much you could manipulate via Finder, right down to dragging in pre installed Windows applications from a Finder copy on a Mac drive into Windows. Once dragged in to the VPC area (the correct directory obviously) they usually only requiring a 'Repair' on running, saving hours of installing from Windows application disks and subsequent required updates. MS Office was a good example. I could have it up and running in Windows in minutes in a new VPC set up using the Finder .

Talking of backing up ... I have been continuing to clone my entire drive weekly using SuperDuper and I assume the Parallel's installation goes with it OK. The folks at SuperDuper tell me they make no claim about being able to back up a Boot Camp area. I have to test a clone I have made and see if the Parallel's area is OK, I have assumed it is but not actually tested it.

If Parallel's is cloned OK then it may be one reason not to use the Boot Camp set up if the native Windows boot is not a requirement. It isn't for me, no gaming just the need for IE on dumb Realtor MLS web sites that use Active X all the bloody time.

The latest Parallel's ability to hide Windows and have IE in the Mac's dock is truly great. It has removed my wife's (she is the Realtor needing IE) confusions about having two OSs on her MacBook, now it as if she only has one, the good one :).

One tip for anyone using Parallels, install Apple's PC version of Bonjour in the Windows area and then printing to any printer attached to a Mac on your network is truly Mac like (i.e. it works). No need to fight with the Windows side at all. Oh yes one last tip ... I have installed Apple's Desktop remote and I can look after the wife's MacBook anytime she has a user problem from my G5 and on my large displays, ADR rocks! Parallels is controllable remotely too including copy and paste.

Merry Christmas one and all :)

[cool11]

Depends on what you're doing. If you're looking to run Windows, because you need to run some application or another for work, then I think that Parallels, especially with Coherence, makes a very compelling case. If you're looking for a breadth of OS support, especially in the UNIX realm, like Solaris x86, then I might be a bit more compelled toward VMWare, only because of the target markets for each.

IMHO, Parallels is geared more toward desktop users, generally running Windows, but perhaps running one variant of Linux or another. VMWare is more of a "kitchen sink" solution, doing everything reasonably well, but not really exceling in any one area.

Also, VMWare tends to be more popular as an enterprise solution, so there can be some benefits to being able to easily (I know, there are tools that allow conversion, but it's still an extra step) move VMs between environments.

I haven't installed the VMWare product on my own Mac yet, although I have been running it under Linux for some time. IMHO, VMWare's disk I/O can be a bit sluggish, but having not installed it on a Mac yet, I can't really do any kind of side-by-side comparison.



Not a silly question, but, fortunately, the answer is that for which you'd hoped. In either application, upgrading generally involves two steps:

Upgrade the application itself. This is generally a matter of just running the installer.
Upgrade the OS-specific tools on the guest OS. Under Windows, this is just a matter of selecting "Install tools" (or something like that) from the application menu. That will mount the CD Image that has the tools, and run the installer. The whole process takes about a minute, plus a reboot.

Any upgrades that will need to be done to your guest OS images will be done automatically. You will not need to re-install anything in the guest OS. It is important however, that when upgrading a VM application like Parallels or VMWare that you read the release notes for the specific upgrade steps for that version! A lot of problems can be caused if you don't follow those directions exactly, as some people who are running Parallels with their Boot Camp partitions have found.

In short, product upgrades are very easy, regardless of whether you're running VMWare or Parallels.

Having said all of that, I installed Beta 2 of Parallels yesterday, once their website came back up, and it's not bad, but it is a little less stable than Beta 1. It's crashed a couple of times on me so far. Being able to run command windows in Coherence mode is nice, but I'm finding that there are still a few instances where I have to run in a window, in order to see certain things. The most annoying is PuTTY's session window. The terminal window works fine, but the session window seems to suffer the same issue as command windows did in Beta 1.

If your need for Parallels is critical, then I might hold off from installing Beta 2, unless the new feature set looks really compelling. If, however, you can live with an occasional crash here or there, it's certainly useable.

Thanks for your response.

I did not understood the step 2. 'Upgrade the OS-specific tools on the guest OS...'
How can you do it? Is it an option in parallels or something else?

[cool11]

Someone asked this at the start of the thread and didn't get an clear answer. I suspect I know the answer but just checking.

If Parallels is up and running but no Boot Camp, can the two be linked now, i.e. install Boot Camp and use existing Parallel's area. The answer that was given assumed Boot Camp came first not Parallels. I can see how a new Parallels installation can simply be pointed to Boot Camp's Windows area but I think the questioner and certainly this is my question, what about installing Boot Camp and pointing it to use the current Parallel's installation? I don't see this working.

I wonder if a Boot Camp area can be set up and somehow the current Parallel's data can be moved there using Finder and then Parallel's set up as if new to utilize this data? I am just hoping to find a way to avoid hours of updating Windows again after initial installation.

In the old VPC days it was amazing how much you could manipulate via Finder, right down to dragging in pre installed Windows applications from a Finder copy on a Mac drive into Windows. Once dragged in to the VPC area (the correct directory obviously) they usually only requiring a 'Repair' on running, saving hours of installing from Windows application disks and subsequent required updates. MS Office was a good example. I could have it up and running in Windows in minutes in a new VPC set up using the Finder .

Talking of backing up ... I have been continuing to clone my entire drive weekly using SuperDuper and I assume the Parallel's installation goes with it OK. The folks at SuperDuper tell me they make no claim about being able to back up a Boot Camp area. I have to test a clone I have made and see if the Parallel's area is OK, I have assumed it is but not actually tested it.

If Parallel's is cloned OK then it may be one reason not to use the Boot Camp set up if the native Windows boot is not a requirement. It isn't for me, no gaming just the need for IE on dumb Realtor MLS web sites that use Active X all the bloody time.

The latest Parallel's ability to hide Windows and have IE in the Mac's dock is truly great. It has removed my wife's (she is the Realtor needing IE) confusions about having two OSs on her MacBook, now it as if she only has one, the good one :).

One tip for anyone using Parallels, install Apple's PC version of Bonjour in the Windows area and then printing to any printer attached to a Mac on your network is truly Mac like (i.e. it works). No need to fight with the Windows side at all. Oh yes one last tip ... I have installed Apple's Desktop remote and I can look after the wife's MacBook anytime she has a user problem from my G5 and on my large displays, ADR rocks! Parallels is controllable remotely too including copy and paste.

Merry Christmas one and all :)

It would be very useful to know if super duper takes backup even for all parallels data.

[ecking]

Am I the only one that likes bootcamp? I like keeping windows and osx completely separate, accessed only when I want. Maybe if you develop webpages or programs or something you might like it, but I personally am 100% satisfied with the bootcamp way of doing things.

[sunilraman]

Yeah with MS Virtual PC on Mac it was "easy" to just see the virtual machines as files in the Finder, just back up that and all is good. Super Duper and all that take it well.

I have no experience with Parallels so I don't know if you see the entire virtual machine image as a Single File??

[doh123]

Am I the only one that likes bootcamp? I like keeping windows and osx completely separate, accessed only when I want. Maybe if you develop webpages or programs or something you might like it, but I personally am 100% satisfied with the bootcamp way of doing things.

I only like bootcamp for playing games. When/if i can ever have complete access and performance of the video card through parallels, Id much rather do that. I'm not sure why you would rather only do one OS at a time, unless you dont like to multitask. I perfer having 10 - 15 things going at once.

[aplnub]

It would be very useful to know if super duper takes backup even for all parallels data.

Yes, the virtual image of XP inside your Mac but not on the bootcamp partition. I assume you could have SuperDuper clone the other partition but I have never done that since the only bootcamp partition is on my MBP. I don't do backups of my notebooks since they operate totally off the iDisk or use network file access.

[BlackSummerNight]

..I'm using a MBP with 1G of ram, and the program is sloooow to load,, slow when using Windows XP, slow when shutting XP down.:\

[aplnub]

..I'm using a MBP with 1G of ram, and the program is sloooow to load,, slow when using Windows XP, slow when shutting XP down.:\

My bootup times in Parallels is roughly 7 seconds. Shutdown is another story with the latest Beta. Sometimes, it never makes it. :(