Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 14th Sep 2010 21:28 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Mac OS X "Parallels Desktop 6 for Mac launched today with a number of new features and refinements for users looking to run alternative operating systems in virtual environments on their Macs. As summarized on Parallels' site, the update brings enhancements to gaming and graphics, simpler setup and integration, greater manageability and mobility, and better performance. Beyond improvements to the standard Parallels Desktop application for Mac OS X, the company has also released a new, free iOS application, Parallels Mobile, bringing remote access on the iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch to users running the desktop software."
Thread beginning with comment 441011
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Definitely an improvement
by theosib on Wed 15th Sep 2010 03:26 UTC
Member since:

Parallels 3 was good. Parallels 4 and 5 were dogs. Painfully slow. Finally, they've managed to deal with most of the regressions in Parallels 6.

The problem with Parallels 6 is that it's a massive memory hog. I thought that giving the VM half of my 3 gigs of RAM would work out well. But Parallels takes up way more than that AND it locks down the VM's RAM so it isn't swappable. The result is that Parallels itself performs well, but everything else thrashes, because there isn't enough free memory left. And then as a result, Parallels slows down because although it's got the CPU, disk access has to compete with swapping.

I backed down the VM to 1 gig, and it's acceptable. It's still constricting, but at least I can now use Safari and Parallels at the same time. Also, if the VM is going to swap pages, it's better to let Windows decide what to swap out (to the virtual disk) than to let MacOS swap out something random that might be critical to VM performance.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Definitely an improvement
by Paradroid on Wed 15th Sep 2010 07:45 in reply to "Definitely an improvement"
Paradroid Member since:

Agreed, I wished I'd stayed on 3 but paid to upgrade to 4. I saw no advantage but thought the UI had got worse and one VM corrupted it's HDD file and I lost everything. That never happened under 3.

I didn't bother upgrading to 5 and don't think I'll bother with 6 either.

It annoys me every time they make a release it's supposed to be 30 or 40% faster than the previous one. If that was the case it would be faster than physical hardware by now!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Definitely an improvement
by Markx on Wed 15th Sep 2010 17:35 in reply to "RE: Definitely an improvement"
Markx Member since:

What are you talking about guys?
I've used PD3 for a long time and it was much slower! The only thing it did fast enough for me was XP VM boot, all other operations are much slower then PD5.
And on W7 it totally sucks.

Try disabling all Mac/Win integration features, maybe it will help but even with integration it's so way faster.

Reply Parent Score: 1