Parallels Desktop 9 for Mac to feature Mavericks optimization, ship in early Sept.

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
The next version of popular virtualization software Parallels Desktop, which allows users to run Microsoft Windows applications natively on their Mac without the need to reboot, is scheduled to ship the first week of September and boast a number of new features, including optimization for Apple's forthcoming OS X 10.9 Mavericks.

Parallels 8


Parallels Desktop 9, which is currently available to select testers in beta form, is also said to feature copy and paste support for Mac OS X virtual machines. The new software also has an improved "Coherence View," which makes Windows applications appear as if they are running natively on the Mac.

The new version of Parallels also reportedly includes improvements to creating and customizing key commands, as well as an improved interface that makes it easier to install Windows on a Mac without a DVD SuperDrive. Apple has been working to eliminate integrated legacy disc drives from its Mac lineup.

Parallels Desktop 9 for Mac is slated to become available in the first week of September ? specifically, a release date of Thursday, Sept. 5 has been leaked through some online resellers. Parallels has said that customers who buy the latest version, Parallels Desktop 8, from an authorized reseller between now and Oct. 31 will receive a free upgrade to Parallels Desktop 9 with a dated proof of purchase.

The last major version, Parallels Desktop 8 for Mac, debuted last September, featuring 30 percent faster 3D graphics and 25 percent faster startup of Windows. It was also updated in June to work with developer pre-release builds of OS X Mavericks.

Parallels Desktop 8 also features support for Microsoft's latest Windows 8 platform, and gives users the ability to utilize the dictation feature in OS X in Windows applications. It also supports the high-resolution Retina displays on Apple's latest high-end MacBook Pros.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 28
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,457member
    VMWare 5.0.3 has been working for me with Mavericks without any issues and without 'yet another' paid update.
  • Reply 2 of 28

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    VMWare 5.0.3 has been working for me with Mavericks without any issues and without 'yet another' paid update.


    Article states that v8 was updated to work with Mavericks. No paid update required if the additional features do not interest you.

  • Reply 3 of 28
    65c81665c816 Posts: 133member
    I wish that the developers would add one single item to Preferences - *DISABLE COHERENCE BY DEFAULT*

    Damn, I hate that shit.
  • Reply 4 of 28
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,105member
    I find that running Windows using either Fusion or Parallels slows down my system to a crawl. It doesn't matter how I try and configure it, Windows runs slow and OSX runs slow. Windows also takes as much CPU as it can and I have 8GB. The best way to run Windows on a Mac is using Boot Camp but that defeats the purpose most people have. They just want to run a couple Windows applications when needed. Even so, every time I launch Windows under Fusion, I have to go through the normal patching process (OS and anti-virus) before doing anything. I might as well just reboot and let everything run faster.
  • Reply 5 of 28
    johnnashjohnnash Posts: 128member
    Rob53, you're doing something wrong then or have a problem. I've been running it for years without and speed issues. I would probably recommend at you bring your ram up to 16gb. But even still, it should not be that bad with 8.
  • Reply 6 of 28
    There is a notice difference in Fusion when a reasonable amount of RAM is allocated. It works fine for me with 4GB, leaving 20GB for the Mac side.
  • Reply 7 of 28
    I wonder if the need for this has declined over the years. Would be interesting to see sales numbers.
  • Reply 8 of 28
    foljsfoljs Posts: 367member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rob53 View Post



    I find that running Windows using either Fusion or Parallels slows down my system to a crawl. It doesn't matter how I try and configure it, Windows runs slow and OSX runs slow. Windows also takes as much CPU as it can and I have 8GB. 


     


    Perhaps the problem is you don't know slow.


     


    I've run Fussion (and Parallels in the past, up to v3), with 4GB, and Windows XP and 7 on it.


     


    I don't know what you expect. It runs plenty fast. Maximized in full screen (so it can get the resources it likes) it's like running natively. All benchmarks also show it to run within 70% to 90% of a native boot of the same OS. Which is like using a 3-4 year old processor -- hardly "slow".


     


    What exactly do you try to run? It's not about running 3D games or video processing -- those offload work to the GPU which is not well supported. It's about running common applications.


     


    Also, did you have any experience with trying to run the same things (VMWare Server for Windows) 10 years ago, in 1GB and 512MB computers? It wasn't THAT slow even then, and I even run Eclipse on the client machine. Now it's not even comparable.


     


    The biggest mistake you can do is switching between the host and the client OS all the time... E.g 10 mins in Windows, 10 mins in OSX, again bring Windows to focus for 10 mins, etc... That way you're mostly causing it to swap memory. 

  • Reply 9 of 28

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rob53 View Post



    I find that running Windows using either Fusion or Parallels slows down my system to a crawl.


    It's probably a memory issue. On my old 2007 MacbookPro w/ 3GB, Parallels has a noticeable impact. If I take that same VM and run it on my brand new i7 iMac with 16GB or RAM it is absurdly fast (it's a WinXP VM); almost immediate start up. Never lags. I just did a Windows 7 Bootcamp VM on the iMac and that one runs very well in Parallels.


     


    If you can get away with running WinXP for your applications, you'll probably see better performance. If you're stuck with Win7 or 8, try turning off as many non-essential features as possible.

  • Reply 10 of 28
    dtidmoredtidmore Posts: 138member


    Rob53,


    I am running an XP Parallels image on a mid 2012 MBP i7 with 16GB Ram and a DIY Fusion Drive and it runs for all intense purposes at native speed with no noticeable impact on OSX (10.8.4).  I have configured my OSX environment such that I DON'T use the Fusion Drive itself for swap (ie I have a dedicated 50GB swap partition on the 750GB 7200rpm HDD).  FYI, I have found that giving an XP image TOO much REAL RAM seems to actually slow it down.  At the moment, I run my XP image with 1.5GB of actual RAM set aside in the settings. I have also found that I get the best performance giving XP a SINGLE processor as that was the expectation when it was designed. I also have Parallels set to favor the hosting OS, NOT the guest OS.  


     


    As others have already stated, Parallels itself is fast and reliable, so I suspect that your real problem is with the way you have the VM configured. FYI, before upgrading to this latest MBP, I was running the same environment, including the DIY Fusion Drive, on a mid 2009 MBP Core2Duo with 8GB Ram and it too ran both Parallels and OSX with ease, so I really don't think that you hardware is the problem.


     


    David T.

  • Reply 11 of 28
    sirozhasirozha Posts: 618member
    Upgrading your Mac to 16 GB of RAM solves the slowness issue caused by running Windows in Parallels or VMware Fusion. With only 8 GB of RAM on the host system (Mac), you should be cognizant of how many OS X applications are running concurrently and try to exit (completely) out of memory hogs such as Aperture while you are running a Windows VM. Also, do not open too many tabs in your Web browser.

    Additionally, you may want to lower the amount of memory given to the Windows VM. If you are running a 32-bit Windows in your VM, there's no point in giving it more than 4 GB of RAM because it can't address more than 3.5 GB, with 0.5 GB left for video memory. However, if you only have 8 GB of RAM on your Mac, I would not give Windows more than 2 GB of RAM. Additionally, if you only have a two-core CPU, I would not give Windows more than one virtual CPU.

    If you are planning to use Windows for serious work (and not for occasional applications not available on OS X), then you should buy a beefier Mac/upgrade your RAM to 16 GB (and give the Windows VM more resources), or alternatively, not use virtualization and run Windows in Bootcamp instead.
  • Reply 12 of 28


    I was always impressed with Parallels. Back in the day when websites/businesses were not optimized for Safari or Macs. I ran Parallels and was very happy. Lots of free updates/upgrades, great customer service and great forum.


     


    It sure beat running a windows box next to my Apple. Ugh! I hated the windows need for a crazy amount of cables, power-bricks and constant security patches , not to mention, the freezing!


     


    P.S. No affiliation, just a good piece of SW!  :)

  • Reply 13 of 28
    stuffestuffe Posts: 391member


    Not like Parallels to announce a new product in a timely manner - usually the best indication that a new version is on the way is when the current version starts to appear in all the bundles - you know, the ones where you get a non-upgradable key :/

  • Reply 14 of 28
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,457member
    barthrh wrote: »
    Article states that v8 was updated to work with Mavericks. No paid update required if the additional features do not interest you.

    I was simply stating my experiences with VMware for those using VMware.
  • Reply 15 of 28
    johnnash wrote: »
    Rob53, you're doing something wrong then or have a problem. I've been running it for years without and speed issues. I would probably recommend at you bring your ram up to 16gb. But even still, it should not be that bad with 8.

    I also experience few issues with a properly configured windows installation. Been using parallels since v3 for cross platform development with virtually no issues at all.

    If your windows performance sucks (oxymoronic, I know ), the issue is likely windows and not parallels.

    On the rare occasion that the issue has been parallels, a simple uninstall / reinstall has never failed to resolve the issue.

    I love the fact that if I screw up a windows instance with a glitched app / windows update / installation, I can just restore the VM and drop all the problems.

    And the ability to run snow leopard under mountain lion means access to legacy PPC apps and drivers (if you have a powerful enough processor).

    As johnnash noted, if parallels / windows is slow / glitchy, you're probably doing something wrong.
  • Reply 16 of 28
    It would be great if the new version of Parallels remembered the position of icons on the Windows desktop. It often jumbles the positions of the icons when the screen changes sizes which it likes to do for no reason when you re-open the Parallels window after it has been minimized. I use IconRestorer to work around this issue.
  • Reply 17 of 28


    Quote:



    Originally Posted by barthrh View Post


    Article states that v8 was updated to work with Mavericks. No paid update required if the additional features do not interest you.



     


    And if the new, additional features are important to you, you can wait patiently to get your hands on them, and you are a registered user of Parallels, my experience has been that it's worth waiting a month or two after a new release since that's when I normally receive a discount offer from Parallels for an upgrade to the new version for $39.95 instead of the regular $49.95.

  • Reply 18 of 28
    I run Parallels 8 for everything I do that requires Windows.

    I find running Windows games on Parallels to work brilliantly. Periodically I get massive slow downs but it seems to be when Safari is open. Close down Safari and everything seems to work ok.

    VMWare is nice but it doesn't even come close to the functionality and power of Parallels.

    I always use Coherence because I find I get better performance with the two OSs working together than I do with fullscreen mode because fullscreen mode robs more resources from Mac OS X than it does in Coherence mode. That's just a personal experience it may be different for you.

    I only have 4GB RAM and my Windows 8 VM is only using 1GB RAM and it works pretty good. Barely even using any resources.
  • Reply 19 of 28
    I run win8 in coherence and full screen mode on my 2009 white MacBook with 4gb ram and a 7200 rpm 500gb HDD and I am very surprised as his zippy it is. My MacBook can boot and I can open Parallels and be up and running in win 8 before my quad core wintel box from 2007 staggers unwillingly into booting xp.
  • Reply 20 of 28
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,158member
    rob53 wrote: »
    I find that running Windows using either Fusion or Parallels slows down my system to a crawl. It doesn't matter how I try and configure it, Windows runs slow and OSX runs slow. Windows also takes as much CPU as it can and I have 8GB. The best way to run Windows on a Mac is using Boot Camp but that defeats the purpose most people have. They just want to run a couple Windows applications when needed. Even so, every time I launch Windows under Fusion, I have to go through the normal patching process (OS and anti-virus) before doing anything. I might as well just reboot and let everything run faster.

    I don't know what's your system configuration is and what Mac you are using but my advice is:

    1. Upgrade to SSD if you have HDD. This is expensive but worth it.
    2. Upgrade your RAM to at least 8GB.

    In your VM setting:
    1. Assign 2 CPU to Windows if you have quad core CPU (1 CPU if you have dual cores).
    2. Assign at least 2GB of RAM (if you have 8GB installed).
    3. Don't mess with anything else.

    I have 2011 15 MBP with quad cores, 8GB RAM, and SSD. On my MBP Windows 7 VM works MUCH faster than my work DELL notebook with the similar processor but 6GB RAM and HDD. I sometimes even run XP and W7 VM at the same time and they run great. I tried that before I upgraded to SSD and it was terrible.
Sign In or Register to comment.