: Thread Direction. VM Fusion/Parallels.


VNJ85
Apr 11th, 2010, 06:28 PM
Just spent the last few minutes searching for threads relating to vmfusion/parallels.

Having a bit of difficulty finding a good thread that discusses the emulators.

Could someone direct me to some useful threads.

I'm trying to decide which program is best for my needs (Windows XP + Quicken 2008).

Mckitrick
Apr 11th, 2010, 07:45 PM
I found vmware to be a little less intrusive to the os especially in terms of kexts. Parallels wouldn't even install on the Hackintosh. The kexts crashed the bootup. Vmware runs perfectly on all the machines I've tried thus far (both legit and Frankenstein macs that I've worked on).

SINC
Apr 11th, 2010, 08:41 PM
▲ + 1 for VMWare Fusion.

wslctrc
Apr 11th, 2010, 09:26 PM
I ran parallels for a while, then removed windows because I hate it. Found later that the version I had won't install on SL and I need to run a windows only program. Asked around, bought VMWare Fusion and highly recommend it.
IOW +2 for VMWare Fusion

ertman
Apr 11th, 2010, 10:00 PM
Not sure how useful the following links are, but some more opinions might help.

I am currently using Fusion 2, and 3 is out. I had recently tried out Parallels 5.

I found that vmware seems to work better on my macbook. I am currently running windows xp and quicken 2008 (cash manager), and everything works well. I found the install and the use of vmware a little better than Parallels. However, I would probably consider there fairly equal with vmware edging out Parallels.

I found that Parallels is better at emulating lower colour depths, but this is irrelevant to your stated needs. Parallels has a better rating on some sites, I suggest you do a google search for this, but from my experience I like Vmware better for XP and Quicken.

https://www.ehmac.ca/anything-mac/84082-vmware-fusion-wow.html

Mac virtualization face-off: VMware Fusion 3 vs. Parallels Desktop 5 (video) -- Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/mac-virtualization-face-off-vmware-fusion-3-vs-parallels-deskt/)

VMWare Fusion 3.0 vs. Parallels Desktop 5.0 (http://lowendmac.com/mac2win/10m2w/vmware-vs-parallels-2010.html)

adam.sn
Apr 11th, 2010, 11:09 PM
I found VMWare fusion MUCH more of a resource hog than parallels. It would crawl to a halt on my 2009 MBP when i launched vista. I installed parallels... no problems.

irontree
Apr 12th, 2010, 07:15 AM
correct me if I'm wrong but these programs are not emulators since they run on Macs with Intel chips? Is virtualization the term? I could be wrong.

ertman
Apr 12th, 2010, 08:14 AM
correct me if I'm wrong but these programs are not emulators since they run on Macs with Intel chips? Is virtualization the term? I could be wrong.

yes, and no. It is virtualization, but not because it is used on macs with intel chips, but rather it makes virtual hardware that you install an operating system, so you are indeed not emulating the system environment.

Paddy
Apr 12th, 2010, 10:52 AM
Another vote here for VMWare Fusion. I had Parallels 3 on my MBP (not my primary machine, but when I got it, I still had the G5) and when I got SL on the MacPro, decided to try VMWare Fusion - especially as I could get it for the same price as the Parallels 5 upgrade, which was getting a lot of complaints about bugginess when it was first released. VMWare Fusion will allow you to buy at the educational price if you have children in school (what a concept!) - wish a few other companies would do that!!

I've had no issues with VMWare Fusion. Use it mainly to view my web designs in Internet Exploder and Chrome, and to open Publisher documents that clients send me.

BTW - I made the mistake of installing the free McAfee AV that was offered with it and it was horribly intrusive and constantly wanting me to update it (and then not doing so) so I dumped it and went back to using Avast. (free) AVG is also good, and free.

Low-gun
Apr 12th, 2010, 11:55 PM
I found VMWare fusion MUCH more of a resource hog than parallels. It would crawl to a halt on my 2009 MBP when i launched vista. I installed parallels... no problems.

Fair enough, but you are talking about Vista, that alone is a huge resource hog...

I haven't used Parallels, but I have used VMware Fusion 2 and 3 and had a fair amount of success. The only issue I encountered was that VM had issues with the ATI Radeon X1600 in my old 17'' Imac and couldn't properly process 3d apps. VMware Fusion 3 disables all 3D functionality with that specific card.

jagga
Apr 13th, 2010, 12:21 AM
I'm running trial of Parallels Desktop 5 on both:
uMB Late 2008 2.4Ghz 4GB RAM Aluminum Unibody, &
Mac Mini 3,1 Early 2009 also 4GB RAM and 2Ghz

On the uMB its running Win7 Enterprise, on the Mini its running XP Sp3.

1. Don't bother with Vista its not worth it and all apps are available (if not the oddball one not recoded yet) for Win7.
No issues running on EITHER and I'm a RECENT convert so you can understand my NEED to have a working VM solution.
I haven't tried VMWare yet but their expertise in cloud and enterprise server may be better if you're going that route.

The ONLY issue I have with Parallels thus far is with Re-installing my BlackBerry firmware for my 9700. I'm using the latest .594 that was leaked (thus Desktop Manager for Mac doesn't find it of course). During my smartphones reboot it only allows 5seconds for the VM to recognize the USB port already connected. Even if I set Parallels 5 to "Ask Me what to do" when USB connection is recognized OR automatically route the usb connection to the VM (even rebooted the Mac - old useless & insane habits are dieing hard, or the VM still didn't alleviate my personal issue).

When someone says "this VM is better" its more helpful they give a particular situation or example that really can be understood since its a real world comparison or example (like mine above).

PS I did NOT run nor install BootCamp on either machine - I like the dynamic use of the HDD that Parallels offers; due to me removing it I recover all HDD space dynamically.

How is VMWare Fusion for USB Port connections?!