New Parallels bundle aims to ease switch from PC to Mac

[AppleInsider]

Parallels, the makers of Windows virtualization software for Mac, unveiled a new application bundle Tuesday that allows PC users to switch to OS X while retaining their programs and data.

The Parallels Desktop Switch to a Mac Edition allows users to bring their files and familiar applications from a Microsoft Windows-based PC. It relies on the Parallels Desktop 4.0 software to give users the ability to run their PC applications within OS X without running Boot Camp. It is available for $99.99 direct from Parallels.

"The growth in switching is partially due to the ease-of-use and cool capabilities of the Mac," said Serguei Beloussov, CEO of Parallels. "However, users don’t want to lose the data they have accumulated and the applications they are already familiar with. Building on our proven track record of Mac innovation, we have addressed this concern and made learning the new operating system even simpler through interactive on-demand tutorials."

The new edition of Parallels Desktop includes more than two hours of interactive video tutorials, a reference card, the Parallels high speed USB transfer cable and Enhanced Parallels transporter combo for transferring files, and Parallels Desktop for Mac 4.0 all bundled into one package. It requires an Intel-based Mac running Mac OS X 10.4.11 or later, and a PC with Windows XP SP2 or Windows Vista with a DVD compatible drive.

Seamless Integration: Move back and forth between apps, copy and paste data, drag and drop files.

The new bundle also includes Acronis Disk Director Suite, Acronis True Image Home, and Parallels Internet Security powered by Kaspersky, together worth $180 in value.

Parallels sees the smooth transition of PC users to the Mac as an important part of the switching process. In Apple's June quarter, it was reported that half of all Mac buyers in Apple retail locations were switching from the PC.

Keep your Windows-only programs: Parallels lets you keep your Windows access without sacrificing anything.

In a recent test, Parallels was found to outperform competitor VMware Fusion, routinely besting it by running 14 percent to 20 percent faster. Parallels can virtualize both Windows XP and Vista in a variety of configurations, allowing users to run Windows software within Mac OS X.

Get the Windows-only 3D graphics on the Mac: Use the Windows-only technology to run select 3D games and graphics applications right on your Mac.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[digitalclips]

Excellent, more help so the poor Windows users escape to freedom. I have not checked yet but I hope those with 4.0 already can avail themselves of these new tools.

I use both VMWare and Parallels for testing purposes I have to think VMWare will be upgrading soon to match the speed and multicore performance of Parallels 4. I also hope Snow Leopard will further enhance the possibilities of even greater performance.

[doyourownthing]

sounds excellent! i honestly prefer virtualbox to parallels, but this tool sounds great

run for your freedom!

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by doyourownthing

sounds excellent! i honestly prefer virtualbox to parallels, but this tool sounds great

run for your freedom!

I will have to check that out as I like to test everything I can get my hands on with our products ... What is it you prefer about it over the other products if I may ask?

[bdkennedy1]

All of this integration actually confuses new Mac users instead of helping them. I work in an office of switchers and I was constantly being called over to help the user out of a Parallels jam.

Parallels isn't helping the user use Windows, it's helping the user use parts of Windows mixed in with OS X. So now the user isn't just using Windows or OS X, they are using this confusing, integrated combination of both which is just as difficult for them to learn as OS X alone.

We switched to VMWare Fusion where Windows is all contained in one window and I haven't had to help anyone with anything since.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by bdkennedy1

All of this integration actually confuses new Mac users instead of helping them. I work in an office of switchers and I was constantly being called over to help the user out of a Parallels jam.

Parallels isn't helping the user use Windows, it's helping the user use parts of Windows mixed in with OS X. So now the user isn't just using Windows or OS X, they are using this confusing, integrated combination of both which is just as difficult for them to learn as OS X alone.

We switched to VMWare Fusion where Windows is all contained in one window and I haven't had to help anyone with anything since.

I must admit most switchers I know use Parallels et al as the 'Ok now I can make the switch' excuse but in the end never use or even need Windows again.

[amac4me]

Anything that helps and facilitates the switch to a Mac

[doyourownthing]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

I will have to check that out as I like to test everything I can get my hands on with our products ... What is it you prefer about it over the other products if I may ask?

virtualbox is fairly easy to use and VERY resource effective. i use it for work, because i need windows for some tasks.

and it's free

i've tried vmware and parallels and switched to virtualbox mainly because of the cost factor. all three are great tools.

if i didn't have to use windows for work, i would not have it installed in my computer...

[teckstud]

Now imagine if MS crippled access to Windows in Windows 7 the way Apple cripples iTunes access to Palm.

[nitro]

i used three products.

parallel, VMWARE, and virtualbox. VMWARE seem do do well on my macpro running 64bit XP

[akhomerun]

i don't believe virtualization software like parallels is the kind of software that really helps with switching to mac, because, in essence, you aren't actually switching, you are actually still using your copy of windows you paid for to run certain applications that either aren't on Mac or the user doesn't know how to replace with Mac applications.

i would think that parallels would only be useful for offices that use IE6 / windows enterprise applications.

anything besides enterprise office apps will probably work better using boot camp (games, windows-only browser plugins, etc).

i guess i'm not saying that virtualization is bad or that i wouldn't use it, but i don' t think it would ease a mac/windows transition at all, in fact it would probably make it harder since most people don't even understand the idea of virtualization (they barely understand the concept of an operating system in the first place). virtualization is mainly for business and power users.

[al_bundy]

when i see a month of no threads about Mac issues at forums.macrumors.com is when i think about switching to a Mac

no hard drive clicks, no slowing down SATA speeds, no imac screen issues out of warranty, no freeze ups due to faulty graphics chips, no mention of restoring iphones as new phones to solve simple problems. seems like a lot of people are having battery, GPS and app issues when upgrading to a new iphone OS or restoring from a backup

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by akhomerun

i don't believe virtualization software like parallels is the kind of software that really helps with switching to mac, because, in essence, you aren't actually switching, you are actually still using your copy of windows you paid for to run certain applications that either aren't on Mac or the user doesn't know how to replace with Mac applications.

i would think that parallels would only be useful for offices that use IE6 / windows enterprise applications.

anything besides enterprise office apps will probably work better using boot camp (games, windows-only browser plugins, etc).

i guess i'm not saying that virtualization is bad or that i wouldn't use it, but i don' t think it would ease a mac/windows transition at all, in fact it would probably make it harder since most people don't even understand the idea of virtualization (they barely understand the concept of an operating system in the first place). virtualization is mainly for business and power users.

Remember it is a check box on the purchase for may, as in 'I could run Windows if I had to' .. I agree it's a bad idea for the type you refer to, the ones that don't know how to copy and paste or where they saved that document to ... lol. However for many it is useful to have access to both and why not do that on the best hardware?

I have to test everything we do (web, video, 3D etc) on Windows as it is so flakey and we often have to do mods to enable Windows versions to work as desired so it is an easy way to test as I can have XP, Vista and 7 all running at the same time and still have my Mac OS.

[John.B]

Ironically, the death knell of OS/2 was when it could "seamlessly" run Windows programs, as there was no reason to write any more OS/2 applications from that day forward. Something to think about.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by al_bundy

when i see a month of no threads about Mac issues at forums.macrumors.com is when i think about switching to a Mac

no hard drive clicks, no slowing down SATA speeds, no imac screen issues out of warranty, no freeze ups due to faulty graphics chips, no mention of restoring iphones as new phones to solve simple problems. seems like a lot of people are having battery, GPS and app issues when upgrading to a new iphone OS or restoring from a backup

You are too funny

I have PCs and Macs. So I do know about both. I run several Macs all day seven days a week and have no issues. These range from a decade old iBook, still running perfectly and using the latest OS version of Leopard, MacBooks and an 8 Core Mac Pro with several TB of hard drives and many external drives. Shall I repeat ... no problems.

I should point out I am very cruel to my Macs too. For example on a typical work day I can be capturing high definition video to a Firewire 800 external drive into Final Cut Pro while at the same time watching video clips in QT, converting video formats in Visual Hub, uploading to an FTP with Transmit (20 threads) and also downloading from another using Thoth (6 threads) and reading Mail (six accounts) and surfing the web in Safari and Firefox ... yes at the same time ... all the above at the same time. No freezes, no hangs no slow downs .... Oh I forgot Time Machine too.

Meanwhile do I understand correctly ... you are using a PC and waiting for Macs to be stable? ROFL

[christopher126]

I used the original virtual PC (VPC) way back that I think MS eventually bought. It was way too slow and basically unusable. Probably due in part to Apples propensity to ship Macs with insufficient RAM. And at that time adding more RAM was expensive.

Now I use Parallels (since beta) with XP and it is great. The speed is fine, but with 4.0 they seem to have it using almost no system resources when it is open but idle. This is a great improvement, because before 4.0 it would use half your RAM and both 'OS' slowed down appreciably.

I have not used the other two virtual programs mentioned above, but from what I've read it seems Parallels is the fastest and putting the most effort into new releases with major improvement.

I have to use only one windows program (I'm a Realtor) to access the a small regional web based MLS website and it is a pain. I really do detest windows which is clunky and clumsy. I can't wait till this MLS company supports something other than IE6. The good news is in the larger Phoenix, AZ market their MLS runs on Safari which is a dream.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by christopher126

I used the original virtual PC (VPC) way back that I think MS eventually bought. It was way too slow and basically unusable. Probably due in part to Apples propensity to ship Macs with insufficient RAM. And at that time adding more RAM was expensive.

Now I use Parallels (since beta) with XP and it is great. The speed is fine, but with 4.0 they seem to have it using almost no system resources when it is open but idle. This is a great improvement, because before 4.0 it would use half your RAM and both 'OS' slowed down appreciably.

I have not used the other two virtual programs mentioned above, but from what I've read it seems Parallels is the fastest and putting the most effort into new releases with major improvement.

I have to use only one windows program (I'm a Realtor) to access the a small regional web based MLS website and it is a pain. I really do detest windows which is clunky and clumsy. I can't wait till this MLS company supports something other than IE6. The good news is in the larger Phoenix, AZ market their MLS runs on Safari which is a dream.

As I understand it, VPC was an emulator not a virtual machine so a big difference in performance. Until Apples used Intel chips that was the only way.

[John.B]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Now imagine if MS crippled access to Windows in Windows 7 the way Apple cripples iTunes access to Palm.

Apple didn't cripple anything, they have a defined interface to the iTunes library that seems to work well enought for RIM and others who've gone to the trouble to write their own sync software to their own hardware. Its well documented and AFAICT is straight forward to implement. What Apple has done is to not allow Palm to spoof the Pre as if it were an Apple iPod.

Originally Posted by al_bundy

when i see a month of no threads about Mac issues at forums.macrumors.com is when i think about switching to a Mac

Not being snarky, but if you aren't interested in Macs wouldn't there be a Windows forum you'd be happier hanging out at? Reading "issues" forums is always going to be self selecting; the people with no problems tend to not be starting threads like "everything is working great". You'd see the same thing at an HP or Acer forum (maybe more so).

[doyourownthing]

Originally Posted by christopher126

I used the original virtual PC (VPC) way back that I think MS eventually bought. It was way too slow and basically unusable. Probably due in part to Apples propensity to ship Macs with insufficient RAM. And at that time adding more RAM was expensive.

Now I use Parallels (since beta) with XP and it is great. The speed is fine, but with 4.0 they seem to have it using almost no system resources when it is open but idle. This is a great improvement, because before 4.0 it would use half your RAM and both 'OS' slowed down appreciably.

I have not used the other two virtual programs mentioned above, but from what I've read it seems Parallels is the fastest and putting the most effort into new releases with major improvement.

I have to use only one windows program (I'm a Realtor) to access the a small regional web based MLS website and it is a pain. I really do detest windows which is clunky and clumsy. I can't wait till this MLS company supports something other than IE6. The good news is in the larger Phoenix, AZ market their MLS runs on Safari which is a dream.

give virtualbox a try...it's updated every 3 weeks or so, very good software, and free.

[Mac Voyer]

I bet it is more about peace of mind than actual usability. The PC user who walks into an Apple store now has one less reason not to switch. They no longer have to be concerned about that huge investment in PC software that will suddenly become unusable. They now have time to slowly transition all of their software to Mac versions. I don't know that most people will actually do it, but now they do not have to fear losing their investment.

[al_bundy]

Originally Posted by John.B

Apple didn't cripple anything, they have a defined interface to the iTunes library that seems to work well enought for RIM and others who've gone to the trouble to write their own sync software to their own hardware. Its well documented and AFAICT is straight forward to implement. What Apple has done is to not allow Palm to spoof the Pre as if it were an Apple iPod.


Not being snarky, but if you aren't interested in Macs wouldn't there be a Windows forum you'd be happier hanging out at? Reading "issues" forums is always going to be self selecting; the people with no problems tend to not be starting threads like "everything is working great". You'd see the same thing at an HP or Acer forum (maybe more so).

most iphone users run Windows and will continue to do so

[John.B]

Originally Posted by al_bundy

most iphone users run Windows and will continue to do so

That's why there is a separate iPhone forum.

This forum is for Mac Applications.

[RichL]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

I have PCs and Macs. So I do know about both. I run several Macs all day seven days a week and have no issues. These range from a decade old iBook, still running perfectly and using the latest OS version of Leopard, MacBooks and an 8 Core Mac Pro with several TB of hard drives and many external drives. Shall I repeat ... no problems.

You've obviously never owned a MacBook Pro. I love mine but I don't know of many owners you haven't had to send theirs in for repair at some stage. It's like my Xbox 360 - it's so annoying when it breaks because, when it's away for repair, I realize how much I use it.

BTW, did you have many problems installing Leopard on your iBook? I recently installed Leopard on an old G4 and the amount of HDD space Leopard + iWork '09 ate up was frightening. I had to transfer all of the user data to an external HDD.

[PersonMan]

Originally Posted by RichL

You've obviously never owned a MacBook Pro. I love mine but I don't know of many owners you haven't had to send theirs in for repair at some stage.

I've owned several MacBook Pros, and I have NEVER had to send in ANY of them for repairs. Your experience is not typical, and relying on the internet to gauge how reliable the machines are is a poor way to do it. I can guarantee you that for every person that complains about problems there are probably at least hundreds of others who have never had problems.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by RichL

You've obviously never owned a MacBook Pro. I love mine but I don't know of many owners you haven't had to send theirs in for repair at some stage. It's like my Xbox 360 - it's so annoying when it breaks because, when it's away for repair, I realize how much I use it.

BTW, did you have many problems installing Leopard on your iBook? I recently installed Leopard on an old G4 and the amount of HDD space Leopard + iWork '09 ate up was frightening. I had to transfer all of the user data to an external HDD.

The iBook is an old G4 it has 512 MB RAM and a 40 GIG drive of which about 18 Gigs are free and no problem with Leopard install at all. I also have iLife and iWorks (I didn't bother with some apps such as Garage band or iDVD) on it but to be honest I use it as a web and mail machine as it is a wee bit slow by modern standards.

I have two MacBooks and both have been without problems. The latest (new as of last Christmas) is using the 24" LCD and gets taken all over the place during the day and plugged into the 24" every evening. I admit a friend had graphics card issues with his MacBook Pro a few years back. My only Apple product ever returned was the 23" Cinema display when they first came out and Apple had a replacement on my desk less than 48 hours later. I use the 30" versions now and they have been without fault.

p.s. using the term 'Obviously' is a wee bit risky absent knowing the facts

[tawilson]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Now imagine if MS crippled access to Windows in Windows 7 the way Apple cripples iTunes access to Palm.

It's access that Palm shouldn't have to iTunes. They have the XML files for that.

[paxman]

Originally Posted by bdkennedy1

All of this integration actually confuses new Mac users instead of helping them. I work in an office of switchers and I was constantly being called over to help the user out of a Parallels jam.

Parallels isn't helping the user use Windows, it's helping the user use parts of Windows mixed in with OS X. So now the user isn't just using Windows or OS X, they are using this confusing, integrated combination of both which is just as difficult for them to learn as OS X alone.

We switched to VMWare Fusion where Windows is all contained in one window and I haven't had to help anyone with anything since.

Looking at the screenshots - those were my thoughts, too.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by John.B

Not being snarky, but if you aren't interested in Macs wouldn't there be a Windows forum you'd be happier hanging out at? Reading "issues" forums is always going to be self selecting; the people with no problems tend to not be starting threads like "everything is working great". You'd see the same thing at an HP or Acer forum (maybe more so).

You have to wonder why he is always here don't you? lol ... How many real Mac users hang out all day on the HP or Acer forums i wonder?

[chronster]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Now imagine if MS crippled access to Windows in Windows 7 the way Apple cripples iTunes access to Palm.

You've tried to make this point before but it doesn't really fit

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by paxman

Looking at the screenshots - those were my thoughts, too.

I had to stop my wife (a Mac and PC user but no expert) from using Coherence Mode as it confused the hell out of her. She can cope with the defined window in which XP is running ... just ... lol.

[ She needs XP only for accessing FL MLS as she is a Realtor otherwise we would not need XP. (Yes I know some MLS systems work on a Mac ... FL doesn't)]

[chronster]

Originally Posted by al_bundy

when i see a month of no threads about Mac issues at forums.macrumors.com is when i think about switching to a Mac

no hard drive clicks, no slowing down SATA speeds, no imac screen issues out of warranty, no freeze ups due to faulty graphics chips, no mention of restoring iphones as new phones to solve simple problems. seems like a lot of people are having battery, GPS and app issues when upgrading to a new iphone OS or restoring from a backup

Most people will flock to forums seeking help though. It's common on PC forums as well. I really don't understand how you could make your decision based on a forum going a month without a post like that.

[iReality85]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

I run several Macs all day seven days a week and have no issues. These range from a decade old iBook, still running perfectly and using the latest OS version of Leopard, MacBooks and an 8 Core Mac Pro with several TB of hard drives and many external drives. Shall I repeat ... no problems.

I should point out I am very cruel to my Macs too. For example on a typical work day I can be capturing high definition video to a Firewire 800 external drive into Final Cut Pro while at the same time watching video clips in QT, converting video formats in Visual Hub, uploading to an FTP with Transmit (20 threads) and also downloading from another using Thoth (6 threads) and reading Mail (six accounts) and surfing the web in Safari and Firefox ... yes at the same time ... all the above at the same time. No freezes, no hangs no slow downs .... Oh I forgot Time Machine too.

The coin has two sides... you can replace every "Mac" and "OS X" word in your post to "PC" and "Windows" and the same would apply. Point is, there are plenty of PC users who very infrequently run into issues, like myself. What I love is, the same people here who berate Windows and PCs also admit they use Parellels to run Windows on their Macs... but they still insist they aren't Windows users.

To give an analogy, smokers who "quit" but still sneak one in every now and then are still smokers. Same deal.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by chronster

Most people will flock to forums seeking help though. It's common on PC forums as well. I really don't understand how you could make your decision based on a forum going a month without a post like that.

I think he may be on retainer to write such things

[Jamescat]

Image 3 is just image 2 again... even though image 3 exists on the server.

Just thought it might be nice if someone fixes that.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by iReality85

The coin has two sides... you can replace every "Mac" and "OS X" word in your post to "PC" and "Windows" and the same would apply. Point is, there are plenty of PC users who very infrequently run into issues, like myself. What I love is, the same people here who berate Windows and PCs also admit they use Parellels to run Windows on their Macs... but they still insist they aren't Windows users.

To give an analogy, smokers who "quit" but still sneak one in every now and then are still smokers. Same deal.

I think there is a vast difference between being a full time Windows user and having to use it occasionally as you have no damn choice (such as MLS being locked to IE) or in my case to test developments in all OSs. Having said that I have no problem admitting I am a Windows user as well as a Mac user, hence I feel reasonably qualified to comment on both. I have used PCs since before Windows ... OH the sound of the first IBM PC floppy disk drive, I still hear it in my nightmares lol.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by chronster

You've tried to make this point before but it doesn't really fit

Please don't quote him, I have him muted and only suffer his trolling if quoted...

[iReality85]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Now imagine if MS crippled access to Windows in Windows 7 the way Apple cripples iTunes access to Palm.

Although some anti-Mac/Pro-MS people might consider this "sweet revenge" or "just desserts" to Mac users, fact is Microsoft would never do this. That is because although Apple does not return the same courtesy to PC users (allowing OS X to be installed on PCs), Microsoft realizes it is wiser to allow its competitor (and users of its competitor's products) to run its softwares than not run them at all. This is why Microsoft allows Windows, Office, and Exchange (among others) to be run on Macs.

Strategic business practices 101.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by iReality85

Although some anti-Mac/Pro-MS people might consider this "sweet revenge" or "just desserts" to Mac users, fact is Microsoft would never do this. That is because although Apple does not return the same courtesy to PC users (allowing OS X to be installed on PCs), Microsoft realizes it is wiser to allow its competitor (and users of its competitor's products) to run its software than run it at all. This is why MS allows Windows, Office, and Exchange (among others) to be run on Macs.

Strategic business practices 101.

Apples (no pun intended) and oranges. M$ don't make computers they make software to run on other manufacturer's computers. Apple make computers.

[iReality85]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

I think there is a vast difference between being a full time Windows user and having to use it occasionally as you have no damn choice (such as MLS being locked to IE) or in my case to test developments in all OSs. Having said that I have no problem admitting I am a Windows user as well as a Mac user, hence I feel reasonably qualified to comment on both. I have used PCs since before Windows ... OH the sound of the first IBM PC floppy disk drive, I still hear it in my nightmares lol.

Your words are true- the world is a Windows world by far, especially the business world, and in that sense, yes, many can't get around using Windows as many applications have compatibility issues. I was commenting more in regards to the casual user. I just built a new PC not long ago, and upgraded to Vista 64 (mainly so that I could receive the free Windows 7 upgrade, which I did), and while I foresee being a PC user in the years ahead, I do see myself purchasing a Mac down the road, most likely a MacBook Pro as a portable computing solution. I wouldn't think of dirtying any Mac with Windows- not that Windows is bad, its just that if (when) I spend the money to buy a Mac, I would want a Mac experience. For Windows, I have my trusty PC. Again, speaking from a casual viewpoint.

I tend to miss those 3.5" floppy sounds. Same with the modem (sigh).

[nbcbubba]

I've owned a MBP for about 3 years now. It is my first Mac and I agonized over the decision to buy it. The agony was the fear that I would cripple myself and not have access to programs I needed in Windows. As a result, I purchased a program to help me use windows and the Mac, whichever I needed at the time.

You can probably guess the outcome. Like most new Mac users, I quickly found that the stability and usability of the Mac made it preferrable to the windows to use. I also found that anything I wanted to do in windows, I could just as easily do in Mac. Hence, when I discribe my Mac experience to windows only users, I tell them that both of them are just tools used to accomplish a task. I just prefer to use a hammer (Mac) to drive nails vice a rock (windows). I think i've personally converted several dozen windows users and i'll continue to do so as long as Apple upholds the quality they have shown me so far.

As far as Macs having issues... my MBP has been through multiple military deployments and the resulting work up training. In total, I conservatively estimate that I've drug it along through the desert for a total of about 10 months straight and exposed it to temperatures from -5 to 125 farenheit. Throughout this, it has continued to work flawlessly and my wife uses it every day for many hours to this day with no problems.

Do some owners have isses with Mac hardware? Certainly! But I think that comparing Apple verses other major hardware manufacturers, one will see that Macs tend to be of a higher quality and last longer. This, coupled with OS stability, speed, neat features that aren't available to me on a windows computer and the relative inexpensiveness of Apple software has made a convert out of me for a long time to come.