this is not at all related to Parallels (although I do plan to download the fully functional trial version), but I just have to comment that everywhere I go lately (in Seattle), I see people with the new macbook/pro - not only that, but my aunt (who is about to get her job axed because of a buyout by a Canadian company) just asked me which Apple she should buy for her 16 year old daughter for Christmas. I have never tried to sell her on Apple - not once. Of course I advised the Aluminum MB entry model and it sounds like they're going to get it.
I am a Parallels to VMFusion convert. I was with Parallels when the supported sucked and it was in beta and not working on the Mini. How times have changed. I used Parallels until Fusion came out. I tried Fusion and have not looked back.
Saying that, I will have to say that Fusion 2.0 is slower than the previous 1.x version for what I do and has some querks. Not anything that would make be go back. I am just waiting for the 2.x update to move on.
I am glad to see Parallels doing well because this means Fusion will leap frog them, hopefully sooner than later, and that is good for everyone.
We need some benchmarks between the two for sure for plain curiosity sake.
I knew Parallels would respond BIG to VMWare. That's why I held off jumping ship like many of you did here. Let's face it, many of VMWare's new features in Fussion 3.0 were already found in Parallels 3.0, so they're playing catch up to some degree. Now this new version of Parallels really rocks in a big way and once again retakes the lead in terms of features and innovation.
I was tempted to jump ship for VMWare but I'm glad I held out. I can't wait to upgrade to Parallels 4.0
Upgraded to V. 4 and it still won't connect XP or Vista to my wireless network on my new MacBook. Since their support is offering no help, I may have to move to VMWare.
I knew Parallels would respond BIG to VMWare. That's why I held off jumping ship like many of you did here. Let's face it, many of VMWare's new features in Fussion 3.0 were already found in Parallels 3.0, so they're playing catch up to some degree. Now this new version of Parallels really rocks in a big way and once again retakes the lead in terms of features and innovation.
I was tempted to jump ship for VMWare but I'm glad I held out. I can't wait to upgrade to Parallels 4.0
As of the last Parallels release, I haven't tested 4.0 yet, I would say confidently that Fusion is a better product all the way around. Starting with the multi processor option... That is my opinion though...
I am surprised that there are posters who claim that Parallels beats Fusion in any category. I'm not accusing anyone of stretching the truth. Rather, I just can't fathom that other people aren't experiencing the bugs and bad performance I've seen on my machines and my colleagues machines.
I am running the latest build of version 3, and besides being dog slow, I have the following problems:
1. Parallels grabs 50% more system memory than the VM is configured to use. For instance, if I set the VM to 1 GB, Parallels will grab approx 1.5 GB of system memory. Then, when I quit out of Parallels, it never releases it back to the OS! I have to reboot daily because of this.
2. Every time I start a VM, Parallels shows me an error dialog saying that it can't run the VM in Coherence mode. The interesting part is that I don't use Coherence mode -- and just for kicks I tried to switch to Coherence and it works fine.
3. Don't bother to try to run Parallels in any but the primary desktop Space. OS X correctly switches to the correct Space, but the popup list of VMs to pick shows on another Space! When I try to switch back to the Space that shows the popup list, it gets sent to the back of the application windows so I can't select anything. Trying to select which virtual machine to run is a tricky sequence of Ctrl- and Command- combos just to see the list of VMs.
4. Crashes of Parallels and it's Virtual Additions....
5. Loading up Finder's "Open With" menu with strange (and many defunct) windows programs to open my files. (Even tough I thought I turned this feature off, these menu items keep finding their way back.)
Two of my colleagues have moved over to Fusion and have zero issues, speedy Windoze VMs, and tons of free RAM!
I am so bummed that Fusion's conversion app can't seem to read my Parallels virtual disks. As soon as it can, I am switching to Fusion.
I use Virtual Box. Its free and has a smaller memory footprint.
I use my Mac primarily to run Mac applications. Parallels locks too much memory and slows down my system for Mac apps. Virtual Box seems to lock less memory. It still runs Windows fine, doesn't slow down my Mac as much and you can't beat the price... free!
Be careful. I paid $39 and upgraded today and the upgrade process corrupted my bootcamp partition and now I have a useless VM causing me major headaches. Their email support must be swamped as I was notified it may be 3 days before someone from Parallels can get back to me for support. Now I'm creating a new bootcamp partition and starting all over. This is what I get for UPGRADING!?
Are there only certain versions of Windows that you can legally run on a virtual machine? If so, which of the myriad versions are legal?
I think it is (on Vista at any rate) from Business version up. Not the lower end versions. I bought Vista Business OEM from a well known on-line supplier. It was half the price and installed and was authorized by MS no problem.
My only gripe and it is a big one is if set up as a Boot Camp that's one license. If that same Boot Camp volume is accessed from VMWare (I stress same volume, same installation) MS insist this requires a second license. How bloody stupid! I can only use it via one or the other methods, never at the same time and it is the same installation! Go Figure!!!
I am trying now. Vista Business, I want to run Coherence for IETester and IE7 applications.
Man, running this on a 8-core machine with 8GB and VIRTUAL LEOPARD SERVERS would be sweeet.
However, I am trying not to get washed over in the hype.
Converting my Parallels Desktop 3 Image now to 4. It is chugging away. Will update.
I know fiddling with virtual machines is sometimes not that easy.
I just need some cross-browser testing thingys. I wonder what games I could play on my GMA950 errr... Worth a shot, perhaps. Oooh, I know, I'll install Steam. Oh the madness.
Good luck to alls during the upgrade, if you decide to do so.
Believe it or not even if you pay for some of the lower end versions MS choose not to allow them to be used in a VM according to the EULA. As I said in another reply, buy they OEM version. It cost less for OEM Business than most sell the Home Basic version or close to it. I was worried it might not authorize but I took the risk and was happy to see MS authorized it on line no problem.
I use Virtual Box. Its free and has a smaller memory footprint.
I use my Mac primarily to run Mac applications. Parallels locks too much memory and slows down my system for Mac apps. Virtual Box seems to lock less memory. It still runs Windows fine, doesn't slow down my Mac as much and you can't beat the price... free!
the fusion upgrade from v1 to v2 was free which was a nice touch on vmwares part.
I find it intriguing that my previous 2 posts were deleted...
I've now spent 3 hours and 50 minutes, and am re-installing Parallels for almost the 10th time...
I actually got it all installed, and it's working... finally.
It turns out that if you have Boot Camp installed, which I did, you have to update Windows XP while running Boot Camp and NOT while in Parallels. So I managed to foul up Windows so that when I updated to 4, it caused Windows not to run anymore. Now that I've reinstalled, I've removed Boot Camp and have XP running just inside Parallels, and all seems to be fine.
But here's the interesting part:
During the process of trying to fix it, I set the startup disk to Windows, hoping that if I booted into Windows (in Boot Camp), I could update to service pack 3 and fix any problems. However, since Windows was fouled up, it wouldn't even boot.
OK, I thought, I'll reboot into Leopard and re-install Boot Camp. However, even though I held down the OPTION key, I never got the prompt to choose the OS. I put in my Leopard disk, held down the C key after restarting, never got booted up from the install disk.
I called Apple, sat on the phone with the tech for a half hour or more, until I asked if resetting the PRAM might reset my startup disk selection; he thought not, but I tried it anyway, and it reset PRAM and I was back into Mac world again.
Comments
Anyway... back to Parallels :-)
Ok I know this is a Mac Lovers forum only but does this parallels software exist for PC as well? Or is it only for Mac?
VMWARE has windows versions
Are there only certain versions of Windows that you can legally run on a virtual machine? If so, which of the myriad versions are legal?
I know Vista Ultimate is on that list.
Ok I know this is a Mac Lovers forum only but does this parallels software exist for PC as well? Or is it only for Mac?
Yes. http://www.parallels.com/products/workstation/
Saying that, I will have to say that Fusion 2.0 is slower than the previous 1.x version for what I do and has some querks. Not anything that would make be go back. I am just waiting for the 2.x update to move on.
I am glad to see Parallels doing well because this means Fusion will leap frog them, hopefully sooner than later, and that is good for everyone.
We need some benchmarks between the two for sure for plain curiosity sake.
I was tempted to jump ship for VMWare but I'm glad I held out. I can't wait to upgrade to Parallels 4.0
I knew Parallels would respond BIG to VMWare. That's why I held off jumping ship like many of you did here. Let's face it, many of VMWare's new features in Fussion 3.0 were already found in Parallels 3.0, so they're playing catch up to some degree. Now this new version of Parallels really rocks in a big way and once again retakes the lead in terms of features and innovation.
I was tempted to jump ship for VMWare but I'm glad I held out. I can't wait to upgrade to Parallels 4.0
As of the last Parallels release, I haven't tested 4.0 yet, I would say confidently that Fusion is a better product all the way around. Starting with the multi processor option... That is my opinion though...
I am running the latest build of version 3, and besides being dog slow, I have the following problems:
1. Parallels grabs 50% more system memory than the VM is configured to use. For instance, if I set the VM to 1 GB, Parallels will grab approx 1.5 GB of system memory. Then, when I quit out of Parallels, it never releases it back to the OS! I have to reboot daily because of this.
2. Every time I start a VM, Parallels shows me an error dialog saying that it can't run the VM in Coherence mode. The interesting part is that I don't use Coherence mode -- and just for kicks I tried to switch to Coherence and it works fine.
3. Don't bother to try to run Parallels in any but the primary desktop Space. OS X correctly switches to the correct Space, but the popup list of VMs to pick shows on another Space! When I try to switch back to the Space that shows the popup list, it gets sent to the back of the application windows so I can't select anything. Trying to select which virtual machine to run is a tricky sequence of Ctrl- and Command- combos just to see the list of VMs.
4. Crashes of Parallels and it's Virtual Additions....
5. Loading up Finder's "Open With" menu with strange (and many defunct) windows programs to open my files. (Even tough I thought I turned this feature off, these menu items keep finding their way back.)
Two of my colleagues have moved over to Fusion and have zero issues, speedy Windoze VMs, and tons of free RAM!
I am so bummed that Fusion's conversion app can't seem to read my Parallels virtual disks. As soon as it can, I am switching to Fusion.
Are there only certain versions of Windows that you can legally run on a virtual machine? If so, which of the myriad versions are legal?
The ones you paid for.
I use my Mac primarily to run Mac applications. Parallels locks too much memory and slows down my system for Mac apps. Virtual Box seems to lock less memory. It still runs Windows fine, doesn't slow down my Mac as much and you can't beat the price... free!
Are there only certain versions of Windows that you can legally run on a virtual machine? If so, which of the myriad versions are legal?
I think it is (on Vista at any rate) from Business version up. Not the lower end versions. I bought Vista Business OEM from a well known on-line supplier. It was half the price and installed and was authorized by MS no problem.
My only gripe and it is a big one is if set up as a Boot Camp that's one license. If that same Boot Camp volume is accessed from VMWare (I stress same volume, same installation) MS insist this requires a second license. How bloody stupid! I can only use it via one or the other methods, never at the same time and it is the same installation! Go Figure!!!
Man, running this on a 8-core machine with 8GB and VIRTUAL LEOPARD SERVERS would be sweeet.
However, I am trying not to get washed over in the hype.
Converting my Parallels Desktop 3 Image now to 4. It is chugging away. Will update.
I know fiddling with virtual machines is sometimes not that easy.
I just need some cross-browser testing thingys. I wonder what games I could play on my GMA950 errr... Worth a shot, perhaps. Oooh, I know, I'll install Steam. Oh the madness.
Good luck to alls during the upgrade, if you decide to do so.
The ones you paid for.
Believe it or not even if you pay for some of the lower end versions MS choose not to allow them to be used in a VM according to the EULA. As I said in another reply, buy they OEM version. It cost less for OEM Business than most sell the Home Basic version or close to it. I was worried it might not authorize but I took the risk and was happy to see MS authorized it on line no problem.
I use Virtual Box. Its free and has a smaller memory footprint.
I use my Mac primarily to run Mac applications. Parallels locks too much memory and slows down my system for Mac apps. Virtual Box seems to lock less memory. It still runs Windows fine, doesn't slow down my Mac as much and you can't beat the price... free!
the fusion upgrade from v1 to v2 was free which was a nice touch on vmwares part.
I've now spent 3 hours and 50 minutes, and am re-installing Parallels for almost the 10th time...
I actually got it all installed, and it's working... finally.
It turns out that if you have Boot Camp installed, which I did, you have to update Windows XP while running Boot Camp and NOT while in Parallels. So I managed to foul up Windows so that when I updated to 4, it caused Windows not to run anymore. Now that I've reinstalled, I've removed Boot Camp and have XP running just inside Parallels, and all seems to be fine.
But here's the interesting part:
During the process of trying to fix it, I set the startup disk to Windows, hoping that if I booted into Windows (in Boot Camp), I could update to service pack 3 and fix any problems. However, since Windows was fouled up, it wouldn't even boot.
OK, I thought, I'll reboot into Leopard and re-install Boot Camp. However, even though I held down the OPTION key, I never got the prompt to choose the OS. I put in my Leopard disk, held down the C key after restarting, never got booted up from the install disk.
I called Apple, sat on the phone with the tech for a half hour or more, until I asked if resetting the PRAM might reset my startup disk selection; he thought not, but I tried it anyway, and it reset PRAM and I was back into Mac world again.
What a nightmare!
drive. That scared the bejesus out of me but it turned out that there was a pretty easy fix by switching
it to use an image drive and then just switching it back to use the boot camp drive. The preferences
got screwed up or something.
The new Parallels supports as many cores as you have. If you have a Mac Pro, you can set it to use
from one to eight cores. That justifies the upgrade price alone and blows away Fusion.
I set it to use three cores. Heh, weird! ...but cool!
I didn't notice any Windows reactivating. XP Pro continues to work for me.