I’m looking to get parallels or vmware for my imac. Wondering what ppls
opinions are.
Besides web broswers I need to run some windows only stuff, and
wondering
about running MS Office
Opinions?
Thanx
Daniel
On 10 Aug 2007, at 08:56, Daniel N wrote:
I’m looking to get parallels or vmware for my imac. Wondering what
ppls opinions are.Besides web broswers I need to run some windows only stuff, and
wondering about running MS OfficeOpinions?
You’re going to get mixed reaction to this, but I prefer VMWare for a
couple of reasons:
- VMWare’s codebase is known to be cleaner than Parallels’
- VMWare doesn’t create extra network adapters. The extra network
adapters Parallels creates gave me problems with certain applications
and networking in Parallels didn’t seem to work very well - VMWare feels a lot faster to me, both when running Windows and Linux
- VMWare’s Unity is implemented better than Parallels’ Coherence,
i.e. Unity treats each Windows application as an individual entity
(try to use Exposé with both to see what I mean), while Parallels
just puts them all on one canvas with a transparent background - VMWare’s 3D support actually works, while I couldn’t get Parallels
to work (or maybe it did, but not as well as VMWare’s) - Should I need support, VMWare’s should be better than Parallels’
I do know that some people have problems with VMWare, most comments I
hear relate to:
- Printers (network printers) not being picked up too well in some cases
- Importing settings from a PC is easier in Parallels
- Dual screen support in VMWare either doesn’t work or doesn’t work
very well
I don’t need printing, importing or dual screen support, so it’s no
problem for me really.
Best regards
Peter De Berdt
Hi, I really cannot comment on codebases of either company and I really
don’t care because I don’t work for either company. At this time,
VMWare
has a product called VMWare Fusion 1.0 that’s currently in Beta targeted
to
the Mac Intel. On the other side of the fence, you have Paralles
Desktop
3.0 for the Mac in Final Release. Here’s a good comparison between the
two:
http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/02/21/vmwarevsparallels/index.php
Next, please take a look at the demo videos and download a trial:
Paralles:
http://www.parallels.com/en/rc/screens&demos/
VMWare Fusion 1.0
At this time, Parallels is ahead of the game in regards to
virtualization
software on the Mac. However, we’ll see how VWMare counters with their
experience in this field for the Mac. My recommendation would be to try
them both.
Good luck,
-Conrad
Hi Daniel, please tell me that you’re going to use virtualization
software
for running more that MS Office. However, I see the need for it to test
web
applications against IE to be a much better reason. In short, I don’t
see
buying VM software to run applications that exist natively on my host OS
as
a wise decision. Nonetheless, please give them both a spin and I’m very
impressed with Parallels Desktop 3.0 For Mac.
Just my 2 cents,
-Conrad
On 8/10/07, Conrad T. [email protected] wrote:
Yes more than MS Office. I need to run Solid Works and IE from it.
Thanx for your comments. This is quite interesting so far.
-Daniel
On 10 Aug 2007, at 11:12, Conrad T. wrote:
Hi, I really cannot comment on codebases of either company and I
really don’t care because I don’t work for either company. At this
time, VMWare has a product called VMWare Fusion 1.0 that’s
currently in Beta targeted to the Mac Intel. On the other side of
the fence, you have Paralles Desktop 3.0 for the Mac in Final
Release. Here’s a good comparison between the two:http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/02/21/vmwarevsparallels/index.php
This article dates back to February, VMWare has come out of beta last
week and almost all disadvantages (especially those related to speed
and drag-and-drop between host and guest OS) are not applicable to
the release version of VMWare.
Best regards
Peter De Berdt
Hi Peter, thanks for the updated information because I purchased the
pre-order last week.
-Conrad
Dunno… I have 10 licenses of MS Office 2003 that I get with my
subscription to Microsoft’s Action Pack (great buy if you have to live
in
the windows world, although restrictions apply). I’d rather pay $70
for
parallels than pay full-price for a Mac version of Office. 
Daniel N wrote:
I’m looking to get parallels or vmware for my imac.
Is that Intel based?
You should at least checkout VirtualBox ( http://www.virtualbox.org ) it
is free and opensource and runs great on my Ubuntu box. They have a OSX
version and a Windows version. It was a proprietary solution that went
opensource a few months ago. I have been using VMWare for about six
years on Windows, but since moving to Linux have found VirtualBox to be
a better product on Linux than VMWare.
Cheers,
Anthony
On 8/10/07, Conrad T. [email protected] wrote:
Hi Daniel, please tell me that you’re going to use virtualization software
for running more that MS Office. However, I see the need for it to test web
applications against IE to be a much better reason. In short, I don’t see
buying VM software to run applications that exist natively on my host OS as
a wise decision. Nonetheless, please give them both a spin and I’m very
impressed with Parallels Desktop 3.0 For Mac.
But an Intel native version of MS Office doesn’t yet exist for OS X…
Adam
Correction, it runs natively on PPC and in emulation mode on Intel
without
any problems and very fast.
-Conrad
Hi Adam, I’m using it now and it does exist for Mac OS X. Please visit
you
local Apple Store for details.
Peace,
-Conrad
On Aug 10, 2007, at 2:47 PM, Adam C. wrote:
But an Intel native version of MS Office doesn’t yet exist for OS X…
My boss just deleted Office. He says the new iWork, especially Pages
and Numbers, does everything he needs and is faster and much cleaner
to use.
This is also his first Mac, after many years of Windows. It’s been
amazing to see.
I see now I’m like double off-topic.
Peter De Berdt wrote:
- VMWare doesn’t create extra network adapters. The extra network
adapters Parallels creates gave me problems with certain applications
and networking in Parallels didn’t seem to work very well
You can configure Parallels to work without those extra network
adapters.
–
Michael W.
On 11 Aug 2007, at 05:08, Michael W. wrote:
- VMWare doesn’t create extra network adapters. The extra network
adapters Parallels creates gave me problems with certain applications
and networking in Parallels didn’t seem to work very wellYou can configure Parallels to work without those extra network
adapters.
That was when Parallels networking support became completely
unreliable It wasn’t such a pleasant experience for me on a brand
new MacBook Pro, but maybe I was just unlucky.
Best regards
Peter De Berdt
Daniel ----- wrote:
I’m looking to get parallels or vmware for my imac. Wondering what ppls
opinions are.
I’ve tried both and VMWare’s Fusion seems to be faster on my MacBook
Pro. Granted, this is an a$$-metric, but Parallels seems to just crush
my machine, especially the second time I run a VM without rebooting the
MB Pro (i.e. start XP, shut it down, start it back up again). Fusion
doesn’t seem to exhibit this behavior. Fusion also seems to boot
faster. See previous metric reference.
Butch
Although Ive never used Fusion, my previous experiences with VMWare
really
didnt leave a good taste in my mouth. Parallels has been running fine
for
the most part. Only occasionally have issues with coherence mode, which
I
can live with out. Other than that. an occasional freeze of the VM
when
coming out of standby related to coherence. If windowed, runs fine.
HTH,
Richard
On 8/11/07, Butch A. [email protected] wrote:
doesn’t seem to exhibit this behavior. Fusion also seems to boot
faster. See previous metric reference.Butch
–
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
–
Richard J Hancock
Developer/System A.