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.
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
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 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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cool11
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.
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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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?
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!)
Comments
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.
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.
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.
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
...on my 24" iMac 2.33 3 GB ram...
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.
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 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...
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
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.
Pwned
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.
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!
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!)