Home > OS News > Parallels Workstation 2.1 Released Parallels Workstation 2.1 Released Submitted by anshar 2006-03-23 OS News 12 Comments “Parallels today announced the general availability of version 2.1 of its desktop virtualization software, Parallels Workstation. The upgraded version delivers faster performance, better stability, and stronger isolation of virtual machines.” About The Author Thom Holwerda Follow me on Mastodon @firstname.lastname@example.org 12 Comments 2006-03-23 7:33 pm the_trapper The betas have all been solid here. I’ve run various Linux distros, FreeBSD, Solaris 10, and of course Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows 98 using Parallels. If you’re thinking of purchasing VMWare or something similar, you really need to try Parallels out. Also, it feels faster to me than VMWare player on my hardware. Did anyone else feel that way as well? Don’t even tell people to use Qemu, Parallels is an order of magnitude faster than Qemu (even with the kqemu accelerator module). I just wish they’d release a FreeBSD native version of it. 2006-03-24 6:01 pm sean Don’t even tell people to use Qemu, Parallels is an order of magnitude faster than Qemu (even with the kqemu accelerator module). According to the QEMU mailing list archive, the kqemu module (in CVS) is much faster now. I am anxious to try it when the next version comes out. I just wish they’d release a FreeBSD native version of it. I asked Parallels about a native FreeBSD version. They said that they have long-term plans for it, but they will not tell anyone when it will be ready. Top secret stuff I guess. We just have to wait and see. 2006-03-23 7:53 pm raver31 I been using the last few betas of parallels, and I was extremely happy with it. However, since VMware started giving VMWare Server away for free, I do not see the point of Parallels. VMware server runs far faster than the vmware player. but I do agree, Parallels is an excellent product 2006-03-24 8:53 am Obram VMware Server is a server class product and Parallels Workstation is a desktop class product. They are not direct competitors. And VMware Workstation is not free yet 2006-03-24 9:42 am sirwally But there is nothing that stops you from using server on a desktop. It works pretty much exactly the same as workstation (as far as I can tell) yet has added flexibility (and a nominal amount of additional complexity). Server seems to be (at least to me) what you would get if you merged Workstation with GSX Server. In fact, if you look at the licenses for Server, GSX V3.0 is actually what is listed, which is no great surprise. And the client appears to be Workstation’s GUI, with the added ability to connect to remote sessions. I haven’t been able to get the remote session working yet, though. Thank God for NX 😉 Anyway, given that it’s free, I’m wondering if Vmware expects to see a drop on Workstation sales? The primary reason for releasing Server (apparently) was to get more people using it now the financial barrier to entry had been lifted, with the hope that a sufficient number of those would upgrade to GSX/ESX. We’ll see if this works. The model works well enough for companies like RedHat 😉 2006-03-23 8:41 pm DrillSgt Although VMWare Server is free, it is sluggish compared to Parallels IMO. Parallels seems to fly on my machines. The only thing it lacks is the tools packages for platforms other then Windows, which VMWare does have. That is one situation I hope they fix soon, as I like the product, however having to release my mouse constantly with ctrl-alt is an inconvenience. 2006-03-23 8:53 pm valnar I tried Parallels and my benchmark for usage is plain old DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1. This is a test of an emulator’s prowess because the OS operates a much lower level. In this scenario, it’s behind MS Virtual PC and VMWare. I have it crash on me all the time. IMO, it’s not soup yet, even with this release. 2006-03-24 9:52 am Zoidberg I tried it, and for me it was unbelievably slow. I’m running a Pentium D 2.8 GHz with 1GB of RAM. I tried installing Windows 98 and scandisk just…crawled. Same went for the rest of the installation too. I could have installed Windows 98 on a 386 faster than this. Even DOS 6.22 installed really slow. With Virtual PC it goes through all three disk images in a snap. Aside from the slowness factor I didn’t care much for the interface. In Virtual PC you have a nice list of all your virtual machines, but in Parallels you have to “load” them one at a time and if I understood the manual you can only run them one at a time too. One feature I did like was that it allowed you to specify the location of your virtual machines, instead of just sticking them in My Documents like so many other programs these days. Anyway I wasn’t very impressed overall but hopefully it will improve. For now VMware and Virtual PC are far ahead of it in both speed and usability in my opinion. Edited 2006-03-24 09:54 2006-03-24 1:29 pm gcelect Got to agree with Zoidberg, I have given this a try and although its cheap to buy, the slow performance of it outweighs the lower amount you pay for it. I tired installing a few different os’s on it and compared to vmware and virtual pc , its took so much longer. Restoring a backup image with acronis with other virtual machine software takes me like 15 mins, trying it on parallels workstation, took like 1 hour 15 mins to do the same image. I assume this is a combination of there network driver and poor speed of the disk image. With so much competition out there in the vm market, even at the low price, I cant really see who they are aiming this at, personally I feel you are better spending a bit more and buying a better performing solution from elsewhere. 2006-03-24 3:11 pm Obram Yes it is quit slow with guets Win9x and DOS, but it is amazingly fast with Windows 2000/XP and Linux. I think it is just because old 16-bit system are too complecated to be emulated at reasonable speed… 2006-03-24 1:30 pm smarinz1 This was my first time using virtualization technology, and Parallels couldn’t have made it any easier. A co-worker of mine recommended I use virtualization to create a virtual machine for my 10-year-old son to use when he’s surfing the net (he always seems to be downloading viruses, spyware, etc, and it REALLY pisses me off). Regardless, I was a little nervous since my computer skills don’t really go much past e-mailing and checking basketball scores, but I easily created a virtual machine, and now I won’t have to format my computer every other week because of my son’s actions. I don’t know about about the “technical specs,” but for this the novice user, this seems to be the perfect program. 2006-03-24 2:41 pm jmarans Haha, so I guess I’m NOT the only one trying to clean my hard drive of viruses every other day because of my son’s “internet antics.” I had heard virtualization may be a way to avoid this, but honestly, the explaination I heard was totally over my head. I’m afraid I’m going to purchase this program and have NO IDEA how to run it…is it really that simple?