I, like millions of others, use macs at home and windows fista at work. Someone tell me objectively please, is running windows via Parallels or VMWare the real thing, or is it one of those quasi - underwater experiences where everything runs ultra slowly and you feel like you're going to die of a panic attack before anything happens? #parallels5
@thatsmrpotatohead2U: It works really well, at least in my experience. I use VMWare Fusion 2 to run a Windows 7 virtual machine and it works really well. The only headache is that sometimes the control key acts up when I'm using Unity.
(Unity is where Windows apps run in os x) #parallels5
@bagellord: This looks to me (yes a newbie at it) another layer of system level software, do you see this kind of thing eventually merging with system software so that Fusion, Unity etc effectively run in the background and all you get are apps that run together without any kinks cos they are from different universes, as it were? #parallels5
@nevergetitwet: Because as far as I know you can't use a bootcamp partition with VirtualBox. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I like having boot camp on my laptop for battery savings. #parallels5
oh god damit I knew they were going to do this right after the fusion 3 release..now I need to wait on some reviews before I switch back and upgrade.. #parallels5
I found out the hard way that Parallels and Fusion don't coexist well using the same Boot Camp partition. But with all the issues I've had with Fusion so far, I'm curious about Parallels. If it goes on sale, I might give it another shot. #parallels5
I've been using Virtualbox 3.0 to run 64 bit Windows 7 on the 64 bit SL kernel, waiting for Fusion. It's been running so well, I see no reason to shell out the upgrade fee.
In fact, I feel it's BS that VMWare didn't at least patch fusion 2.x to make it run on the 64-bit kernel.
In my opinion, this is what makes Mac OS X better than any Windows regurgitation: the ability to run Windows on a Mac machine. This way, the best of both worlds are realized, but the fact that it is supported on one machine is just awesome. #parallels5
@red_alert360: Your logic is flawed. By saying an operating system that can only run on specific hardware is better than one that can run on virtually anything is backwards.
@red_alert360: It is very feasible to do the same on a windows system. Of course, Apple has no intentions on letting PC users run OSX on a PC and the effect is exactly what is happening to you. You think that been able to run mac and windows at the same time is a Mac sole feature... In my opinion it is very stupid to support a company that puts so many restrictions on you, thanks God Apple is not the dominant software company. #parallels5
@HelloYouAll: I think you mean "Apple isn't dumb enough to foot the bill for supporting every crappy piece of hardware out there".
I don't want Apple to run on every PC, because I would have to pay for that "privilege" and suffer the additional instability of a system that needs to be able to communicate with every piece of hardware ever made.
My WinXP machines are very stable, but Fusion 2 on my MBP still wins out in stability (0 crashes in 2 years on fusion, 2 for Dell Inspiron with same specs), thanks to Apple's tight hardware control. #parallels5
Honestly this kind of stuff is usually more hassle than its worth. In my experience, it is either pretty complicated to set up or never really works 100% as its supposed to. Just reinstall, unless there is some specific stuff that you really need
I know that they do something similar for Windows, but I thought it only transfered docs and pics. It may have been an older version of XP, though. What about if you buy a new computer with Vista, can you transfer apps too (either from another Vista box, or from XP)?
11/04/09
11/04/09
(Unity is where Windows apps run in os x) #parallels5
11/05/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
In fact, I feel it's BS that VMWare didn't at least patch fusion 2.x to make it run on the 64-bit kernel.
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
I don't want Apple to run on every PC, because I would have to pay for that "privilege" and suffer the additional instability of a system that needs to be able to communicate with every piece of hardware ever made.
My WinXP machines are very stable, but Fusion 2 on my MBP still wins out in stability (0 crashes in 2 years on fusion, 2 for Dell Inspiron with same specs), thanks to Apple's tight hardware control. #parallels5
11/04/09
11/04/09
08/25/09
08/25/09
08/25/09
Why don't they sell this separately for Windows users?
08/25/09
not a bad deal. Not that I would pony up $100 for parallels, but for those with the specific need it seems justifiable.
08/25/09
08/25/09
08/25/09
03/09/09
03/09/09
03/09/09
03/09/09
Both are laggy and freeze a bit.
I'm all for BootCamp.
03/09/09
03/09/09
It is.
And you don't have to split the power between partitions, either.
(ugh, ever try running Steam in VM?)
03/09/09
03/09/09