or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Parallels 6 to run 40% faster, launch Windows 2x faster than Fusion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Parallels 6 to run 40% faster, launch Windows 2x faster than Fusion - Page 2

post #41 of 53
I sure hope these guys have plans for a cheaper upgrade price for 5.0 users, gets a bit (a lot) tiring to constantly cough it up for updates constantly...
post #42 of 53
I have used both Parallels 5 and VMWare Fusion 3 on the same machine. Though it is true that parallels was a little faster, it is also true that parallels is far less stable than Fusion. There is just no place for comparison. What good is a program if it keeps crashing?

Furthermore, I find Fusion's interface simpler and easier to use and last but not least, VMWare are improving Fusion's speed - which is already fast - version by version.

I will keep using Fusion 3.1 and I'm looking forward to v4.

post #43 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

Because as good as Virtual Box is it doesn't have anywhere near as many features as Parallels does.

For example dragging and dropping between virtual machine and Mac OS X doesn't work in Virtual Box but does with Parallels and VMWare.

I only use Parallels for Internet Exploder because our call systems only run on IE and will not work using IE under Wine as Wine uses Mozilla's engine to show webpages and our call system doesn't work in Mozilla browsers or Webkit browsers otherwise I'd have no need for Windows at all. But I also use Windows for Office because Mac Office is crap especially Entourage so until they fix that then I will use Office 2010 on Windows and trust me that runs like a dream under Parallels 6.

Drag/drop from window to window? No, but drag/drop through the shared folder, yes. Is it the same, no. Is it worth paying for 'features', no.
post #44 of 53
Wow, I wonder if this article has anything to do with Parallels buying up lots of ad space on AI...
post #45 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by macsyrinx View Post

Drag/drop from window to window? No, but drag/drop through the shared folder, yes. Is it the same, no. Is it worth paying for 'features', no.

Maybe not for you but I use it all the time.

Also copying and pasting using Mac shortcuts is a powerful feature that Virtual Box does not have.

I'm not railing on Virtual Box because I think it's a great product, it's just a product that wasn't designed with the Mac in mind it was designed with Linux in mind. That makes a world of difference when you work in a Mac environment but need access to other environments as well.

Oh and Virtual Box isn't free if you're installing Windows or Mac OS X (which Virtual Box doesn't support) because you still need licenses for the OS... if you're doing things by the book that is.
post #46 of 53
I'm both a Fusion and Parallels customer, but I switched to Parallels v5 last year because it was so much faster than Fusion, and I haven't looked back.

Just upgraded to v6 from v5 today, even though v5 was fast enough for me and rock solid (with a 27" iMac quad under 10.6). I have not explored its new features yet, but indeed v6 seems to be even faster, yet still works without any fuss for me (Windows 7, Office 2010, AnyDVD HD with Blu-Rays).

All-in-all still happy with this product.
post #47 of 53
If you, like me, got the advanced upgrade to 6 for existing users, a newer build is now available:

Build 6.0.11822
(Revision 604190; September 14, 2010)

From the 'Parallels Desktop' menu, click on 'Check For Updates'.

It downloads ParallelsDesktop-parallels-en_US-6.0.11822.604190.dmg from which you can install the update.

The previous was ParallelsDesktop-parallels-en_US-6.0.11820.602974.dmg
post #48 of 53
I just installed the demo, and I must say I'm impressed. Not with the feature set as a lot of these additions seem to bring it on par with Fusions latest release, but rather with the speed.

They also appear to have fixed the IP/Bluetooth issues so that my bluetooth headset is functional. I'm going to run this for a few weeks and if I'm happy with it, I may switch.

One nag though. The timezone reset to Central America from my original VMWare's time zone of Central. It caused me some issues with calendaring and a bit of research to find. Hopefully this is a minor glitch and not an indication of poor quality control that seemed to plague earlier versions. I use this for work and can't be bothered with a large number of bugs.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #49 of 53
Hmm..already had my first crash this morning on the Parallels VM. Not encouraging...
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #50 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Hmm..already had my first crash this morning on the Parallels VM. Not encouraging...

In case anyone is following this thread, having used it for 2 weeks, I must say I'm impressed with the speed. It has some rough edges which I wouldn't have expected, but overall it seems relatively stable. I ended up purchasing it after a week and a half. The feature set seems on par with Fusion 3 with no major differences that I can see, other than allowing you to backup the 'snapshots' instead of the full disk image, but that's a minor thing for me, as I backup my VM's once a week anyway.

Another funny glitch which has apparently been around for years is a time zone bug for people in Central Standard. it gets reset to "Central America" which is irritating. Seems like a dumb bug to leave around for so long.

No other complaints so far that I can't work around.

Speed is definitely there for the guest OS, although I doubt the claims of 40% or whatnot. It Is however, noticeably faster.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #51 of 53
VMWare have been in the game for a long, long time (on servers etc, not Macs). As such, their product is mature.

Parallels is a young upstart, quick to crank out new features, not always fully baked. They integrate Windows into OS X nicely (not my thing). They charge for every upgrade, and don't always squash the bugs in the current products before shipping a new one.

Both are very good products, and their asking prices are crazy. Crazy low, that is.

Virtualbox is free, Open Source and under heavy development. If not for the lack of boot camp partition support, I would use that instead of VMWare. Mac support is new and not that great. On linux it is pretty solid.
post #52 of 53
i heard many good things about Parallels. if i ever get a MacOS desktop or notebook i'll definitely give Parallels a trial run.
post #53 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by emacs72 View Post

i heard many good things about Parallels. if i ever get a MacOS desktop or notebook i'll definitely give Parallels a trial run.

I wouldn't bother with Parallels.

I made the mistake a couple of years ago with Parallels 3. It was very good, but then I went to Snow Leopard 10 months ago and it stopped working. So I was forced onto Parallels 5 as an upgrade.

I dislike intensely having to pay a large upgrade price for an upgrade that I don't want in the first place, especially on full price software that was less than 18 months old. There is a distinct irony that P5 Upgrade cost more than Snow Leopard - I pay more to run Microsoft crappy products on my Mac than I pay Apple to run OSX!

So I bailed earlier this year and went for VM3 instead and it's been just as good.

If you like yearly updates go for Parallels. If you want a product that stays vaguely the same, go with anyone else.

Oh, and I especially dislike Parallels putting an MS icon on the desktop on my Mac.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Parallels 6 to run 40% faster, launch Windows 2x faster than Fusion