Virtualisation for OS X

davegeedavegee
Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
(Full credit goes to vailab over at ARS for the link)



Virtualisation software company Parallels said it will announce a virtualisation product for Intel-powered Macs, with more details becoming available later this week.



http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/...12&pagtype=all



What is Parallels ? Well their web site says that Parallels Workstation is a powerful, easy to use, cost effective desktop virtualization solution that empowers PC users with the ability to create completely networked, fully portable, entirely independent virtual machines on a single physical machine.



In the most simple terms, think VirtualPC but without the huge loss in speed plus stronger OS Support. Oh and the price is nice too... how about $49.95 (if the OS X version is priced the same as the other flavors)



Guest OS Support For:

-------------------

- Windows 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, Me, 2000, XP and 2003

- Linux, Red Hat, SuSE, Mandriva, Debian and Fedora Core

- FreeBSD

- OS/2

- eComStation (I have no idea what that is/was)

- MS-DOS

-------------------



So while we're waiting for the VM-Vaporware we can now wait for the Parallels-Vaporware too!



Dave

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 17
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    I'm becoming more intrigued by the virtualization possibilities... I'm thinking Xen might be an option (with a heck of a lot of work).
  • Reply 2 of 17
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,423member
    Apple better get in gear



    Microsoft gives away Virtual Server 2005 for free



    Apple could and should get some Virtualization stuff going in Leopard Server.
  • Reply 3 of 17
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:



    Even more interesting...



    "The software leviathan stunned a rookery of Linux users yesterday at a conference and expo in Boston with the revelation that it will now provide technical support for the open-source software running on Virtual Server, and would make Virtual Server 2005 R2 available free."



    Linky: http://www.forbes.com/2006/04/04/mic...acescan06.html



    Microsoft embracing Linux? Something is clearly wrong here... Linux, be afraid be very afraid!
  • Reply 4 of 17
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Apple could and should get some Virtualization stuff going in Leopard Server.



    Apple has a LONG road to hoe when it comes to 'all things enterprise' - Hell they don't even provide a way to roll back an OS update (should the need arise) like oh say killing Airport or something minor like that! \



    Oh and another nit to pick...



    Wake on Lan - Sure Apple 'kinda supports it' by allowing you to wake a machine thats sleeping... but on "PeeCee" hardware it can also be used to turn a machine on too... Apple still doesn't support this... (last I checked anyway)



    Dave
  • Reply 5 of 17
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    How better to kill Xen and VMWare??? Just back to the same old pre-trial antics, that's all.
  • Reply 6 of 17
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Somebody clear this up for me. With virtualization would windows run inside osx or would the user choose the os at start up boot?
  • Reply 7 of 17
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by backtomac

    Somebody clear this up for me. With virtualization would windows run inside osx or would the user choose the os at start up boot?



    The former. Virtualization lets one OS run inside another.
  • Reply 8 of 17
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chucker

    The former. Virtualization lets one OS run inside another.



    That would be perfect for me. I'm assuming that it's easy to switch between them, ie like changing apps.
  • Reply 9 of 17
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quite. In fact, one OS (MacOS X) is 'host' to the other OS (Windows, Linux, etc), and, generally, the guest OS is constricted to a window on the host.



    So it'd be pretty much like VirtualPC, but with native (or damned near) speed. For things like games, which want *direct* access to hardware, it's more difficult, but the upcoming Intel chips with the VT-* instruction sets should help that even more.
  • Reply 10 of 17
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,221member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Apple better get in gear



    Microsoft gives away Virtual Server 2005 for free



    Apple could and should get some Virtualization stuff going in Leopard Server.



    Some of my friends need to learn how to read. First off, Microsoft would not be giving away Virtual Server 2005 if it could sell it. Next, the Redmond Monopoly would not add support Linux in VS if it could afford not to. Microsoft has a lot of problems, both external and internal. It is time to stop trying to hide from the "Big Bad Wolf." The "Big Bad Wolf" is not looking quite so big or quite so bad or quite so much like a wolf right now.
  • Reply 11 of 17
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,423member
    I'm not quite getting your point.



    Virtual Server 2005 was in fact a paid SKU. It is free now regardless of whether it was selling before or not. That doesn't obviate if from any merit within the context of increasing virtual server options.
  • Reply 12 of 17
    kukitokukito Posts: 113member
    Parallels already has virtualization software (in beta) available for the Mac that allows you to run most versions of Windows and a few Linux distros. I don't have a Mac yet but would love to read comments about how well it performs. The link:



    http://www.parallels.com/en/download/mac/
  • Reply 13 of 17
    rtamesisrtamesis Posts: 88member
    I installed Parallel's workstation beta for Mac OS X and Win XP on a virtual machine. It clearly has some quirks, although it is still beta. For instance, it would not initially recognize my CDRW/DVD-RW drive. It also didn't recognize the function keys on my MBP keyboard. Third, I can't get the XP virtual machine to connect to my wireless network.
  • Reply 14 of 17
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,221member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    I'm not quite getting your point.



    Virtual Server 2005 was in fact a paid SKU. It is free now regardless of whether it was selling before or not. That doesn't obviate if from any merit within the context of increasing virtual server options.



    My point is very simple. Taken together, Microsoft's conversion of VS from a revenue generating product to a giveaway and its addition of Linux as a VS-supported OS represent a failure of Microsoft's VS strategy. It is not a crisis for Apple.
  • Reply 15 of 17
    sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by rtamesis

    I installed Parallel's workstation beta for Mac OS X and Win XP on a virtual machine. It clearly has some quirks, although it is still beta. For instance, it would not initially recognize my CDRW/DVD-RW drive. It also didn't recognize the function keys on my MBP keyboard. Third, I can't get the XP virtual machine to connect to my wireless network.



    There is apparently some "VT" checkbox is it checked on yours???
  • Reply 16 of 17
    audiopollutionaudiopollution Posts: 3,226member
    If you're interested in a more in-depth discusssion of the VT issue, take a look through this thread on the Parallels website:



    http://forum.parallels.com/thread85.html
  • Reply 17 of 17
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,423member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mr. Me

    My point is very simple. Taken together, Microsoft's conversion of VS from a revenue generating product to a giveaway and its addition of Linux as a VS-supported OS represent a failure of Microsoft's VS strategy. It is not a crisis for Apple.



    Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification and I would agree. I think MS like Apple (both being platform vendors of proprietary OS) both have shown a bit of reticence towards virtualization. The ideology seems to run counter to their RDF dreams of homogenous networks based soley off of their product.
Sign In or Register to comment.