Ars reviews Parallels Desktop for MacOS X, and concludes: "People pondering the switch to a MacBook can rest assured that with the exception of USB device support and hardware accelerated 3-D applications, their needs will be well met by this little workhorse of a program. Between the networking that just works, the impressive speed and the inability of the client operating systems to know they are running within a 'virtual machine', I think you'll be hard-pressed to find software for any x86 OS that doesn't work within a Parallels VM."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2006-05-04
It's maybe me, but I really... really.. really.. don't see what's funny about using Debian for productivity. Personally, for me, I'm much more productive on Debian than on Windows/OSX/any other Linux distro.
It might not work for you and that makes it funny for you that it does work for lots of other people? Honestly, using OSX to do work feels for me like boiling an egg by rubbing it. If you try to bend like OSX wants you to bend, you'll eventually get there. Debian let's me go straight to my goal. Windows feels exactly the same.
Member since:2005-09-10
Yes and some people might try to boil an egg by rubbing it.
Well, OSX sucks a**e compared to any mature Linux distro when it comes to doing bioinformatics, molecular phylogenetics, statistics, development, clustering, server tools or even X11 tunneling. Which is what I need. That, and the Mac GUI and Finder is perfectly useless and bloated, for me. Try managing 50 windows at the same time on OSX. Doesn't work for me. With Fluxbox I can. With Konqueror I can have seamless FTP/NFS/SFTP/SMB and a well integrated command line tracking my movement in the file system. Priceless. While OSX may be pretty to look at (Keynote for instance), the basic stuff is still lagging behind and has always done so on macs. Unfortunately.
Member since:2005-07-04
Trust me buddy, what you are doing is so far away from "basic" it isn't even funny. Honestly, what percent of ALL computer users do you think do bioinformatics, molecular phylogenetics or statistics? 1% is pushing it by a long shot in my opinion. Most probably don't even know what those words mean.
When I think "basic", I think listening and downloading music, burning DVD's, NO COMMANDLINE (I haven't seen a non-geek use a commandline in over 10 years), no clustering and no X11. Throw in some spreadsheets and word processing while you're at it. For 99% of computer users and what THEY NEED TO DO, both OS X and Windows drag Linux around the room, mopping every little inch of the floor.
Your needs are niche, not basic. Macs have their own niche, including media editing, video editing, etc. And guess what, this kind of thing is still lagging behind and has always done so on Linux, unfortunately.
Each OS for a different task. I personally view Windows as a pretty good general use OS, Linux/BSD/Solaris/etc as good for what you do and OS X is perfect for Grandma's and other computer illiterate people (nothing wrong with this, everyone has their priorities, and a lot of people on these websites fail to realize that for the majority of people in the world, computers aren't one of them), as well as for media editing and other related tasks. Hell, even Amiga, SkyOS etc have their own small place in the world of computers.
Oh, and people like pretty interfaces, it's easier on the eyes. After using a Mac, seeing a Linux desktop makes me cringe (although SLED10 does look pretty nice).
Member since:
2005-09-10
since I read a review as nice as this one. Lots of funnyties and well worth my time.
So I can have a Mac for connectivity, hardware compatibility and presentations, Debian for productivity and Windows for . All running at the same time, on the same machine. Throw a roll of heat reflecting aluminum foil into the mix and you could perhaps even use that notebook on your lap. Now that is a winner.