“Parallels has released their latest Parallels 3.0 virtualization software for the Mac. Along with Elgato’s EyeTV software, I find Parallels to be the best third party applications for the OS X desktop. If you have never used Parallels before you are in for a treat. If you already are a Parallels user, version 3.0 has enough new features and improvements to make it an essential upgrade.”
Review: Parallels Desktop 3.0 for Mac
About The Author
Follow me on Twitter @thomholwerda
2007-07-18 11:28 pmDougInKY
I also choose VMware Fusion. Ubuntu seems much more responsive under VMware than it did when I tried it under Parallels. The $39 prerelease price helped as well as Parallels is $80.
I have been using both version 2.x and 3.0 and it works great.
The Boot Camp partition/installation works better under parallels than Fusion.
Also, when you have fusion installed it alters your hardware id on your mac and that can cause problems for dongles and licenses that is using hardware id as identifier.
This is not the case with parallels.
I loved Parallels when it came out. I preordered practically as soon as it was possible. But with the 3.0 upgrade, which I paid, I am not that satisfied. My main grudge is that:
– Parallels isn’t very good with linux (hangs as soon as you have SMP enabled for example).
– Worst of all, since 3.0 it seems it’s been using more and more memory (the WindowServer usage litteraly explodes). If I launch and quit a VM a few times (small 128 mb VM on my 2 gb machine) it then starts swapping like forever which on a laptop means nothing moves. This didn’t happen with 2.0.
I still have my Parallels license but I purchased Fusion too and currently I only use this one. I usually try to support the little company rather than the big standard, but sometimes you have to get practical.
Fusion isn’t perfect either (trying to find how to mount shares is a pain), but it seems much more stable to me.
Anybody try the virtualbox beta for OSX?
2007-07-19 7:46 pmmallard
I have. In short:
-Easily the fastest virtualisation product I have ever used. (although I haven’t really used Xen).
-Good hardware emulation and, like I said, fast.
-No “integration” ala Coherence. Even the ability to launch Windows apps from OS X shortcuts would be nice.
-No USB support (yet) on Mac version.
-Although it claims to support ACPI, my guest OS (Win2k) does not display suspend/hibernate options. Haven’t looked into this, could be a Win2k thing.
I use it because it is faster and uses less RAM than the others and it’s free.
It is interesting to note that a quick read of Parallels’ own forums ( http://forums.parallels.com ) reveals that many other PD customers seem to share the sentiments expressed above re: PD vs. Fusion.
Worse seems to be a sentiment among users of Parallels Workstation (PWS), their Windows and Linux product, that PWS users have been “virtually” abandoned as Parallels chases after the Mac and server markets.
Specifically, the posted PWS releases are 8-months old and will not install/run correctly on Vista or any Linux with a kernel version of 2.6.19 or later. A promised 3.X upgrade was pushed back due to the unexpected challenges in developing the Mac product and is now projected for at least Q4 of 2007.
Meanwhile, nearly a month ago, a maintenance release of PWS 2.X (the current Win/Lin version) was promised to be coming “very soon”, although one Parallels employee has hinted that it may not come until Fall. Attempts to request a clearer schedule for the maintenance release only get answers of “when it’s ready” or descriptions of how hard they are working on the 3.X product which will be a unified code base with both PD and the announced Parallels Server, have near simultaneous releases on all platforms, generally be the greatest thing since sliced bread, and more than make up for the wait.
The growing feeling, especially among the Windows and Linux users (but also noted by some Mac users), is that Parallels may be trying to grow too fast by chasing new markets and, as a result, be stretched too thin to support its existing customers.
VMware Fusion – It just works, Parallels 3.0 did not. Tested both on a 17″ and 15″ 2.4 GHz macBook Pro. Have been unable to get MS XP service pack one to load properly under Parallels, and don’t have the time to trouble shoot it yet. Will check the FAQ’s and forums when my desk clears. In the meantime MS XP service pack one is running very nicely under VMware Fusion.