Forums Index >> General >> Parallels Desktop for Mac



Page : <1> :


Just wondering if anyone else here has tried Parallels Desktop for Mac ?

You can read more in-depth reviews about Parallels around the net, but if you're like me it's also nice to hear an opinion from someone you know (sorta).

I was kicking around my old CD's the other day and came across a Windows XP Pro disk I didn't know I had. So I thought what the heck, and downloaded a trial version of Paralles.

It's a fairly small download if you have broadband, and installation was a snap. It unzips into a disk image with an installer package. It doesn't require a restart.

Once it fires up Parallels guides you through creating an initial virtual machine.

There was only a couple of choices to make and I just clicked on the recommended defaults. I might have made other choices if I had bothered to read the quick-start guide. But we don't need any stinking instructions :)

I slipped in the XP disk, and after Parallels was done making a virtual machine XP started to install. XP was done in about 30 minutes.

After XP restarts, Parallels installs its' own set of tools.

My assumption (from using virtual PC in the past) is this is to allow seamless mouse transitions from the Mac desktop to the Windows screen, allow networking, access to the DVD drive etc.

So in less than an hour, including downloading and installing Parallels, you have Windows on a Mac. Doh!

As you can see, you can use Windows within a small window on your desktop or switch to fullscreen mode. Here is my favorite Windows productivity app in fullscreen.

My initial impression? If you've ever used virtual PC in the past you learned the meaning of slooow performance. Not so with Parallels. I found XP to be quite fast on my Mac. I read that for most process this is true except for 3D acceleration.

In other words if you only need it for work-a-day apps such as Office or email and surfing it's as fast as using a dedicated "real" machine. In fact I found it quite startling fast as I was used to Virtual PC in past years.

Parallels manages a fairly seamless transitions from Mac to Windows and visa-versa. One moment you are mousing across your Mac screen and presto-changeo your cursor goes from black to Windows white. Click in the Windows screen and you are Redmonds clone, click back on OS X and you are back in the reality distortion field.

I noticed a bit of lag in OS X when switching back so I'd recommend you pump up your RAM. My Mini currently only has the stock 512 MB. Also when going to and from fullscreen there was a bit of fast user switching weirdness. Nothing to unsettling though. This could be from lack of RAM or that this is still a work in progress.

Will I buy it after my trial period ends? Maybe. Someday. I would in a heartbeat if I needed to run Windows or any other supported OS and I didn't need 3D hardware acceleration. Right now I'd rather put the $80 into more RAM or for Leopard when it ships. We'll see...

{WalMart free for over 24 months!}

Last edited: Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 3:09:32 PM

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 3:05:55 PM

Parrallels is a nifty piece of software. I've tried it on Windows and Linux and have to say it is one of the best.

I've found VMWare to be faster, though.

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 3:23:59 PM

Only runs on Mactels, not PPC though?

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 3:29:24 PM
MJ

Yes BC, only on Macs w/ Intel CPUs. My father bought Parallels for Mac to run on his Mac Book Pro. I loaded Win2K on it for him and worked like a charm. The only issue I know of is the USB support. He wants to run windows so he can use his GPS unit and mapping software (Windows only). The last time we talked about it, his GPS was still not being recognized by Parallels. I think working on that will be one of my projects over Christmas. One thing he has not done is connect the Windows virtual machine to the network. He has not loaded any anti-virus or firewall software on the Win2K build. A must for any Windows machine, real or virtual.

BTW, have you heard about the newest changes for Parallels? It is supposed to recognize if your Mac has a Boot Camp partition and can use that partition for your virtual machine. I believe it is in Beta right now.

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 3:53:18 PM

Why Mac's are Bad
Why macs suck (Rooster Teeth)

With the Ment@lity of an angry Mob .

Last edited: Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 3:58:51 PM

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 3:56:28 PM

Awesome :), I do not have an intel mac (yet ;) ).. But ill have one before 2008. Probably next summer.. In Belgium Parallels is included for free in the software package.

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 4:00:52 PM

^ Awe-SOME!!! With Linux, we get Xen, which is free off the bat, but still... Parallels is supposed to be easier to use. Still no 3D...
^^ Mind coming up with some explanations of your own , that you didn't have to Google for?

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 4:26:25 PM

Xen isn't very good. I've always found on linux that VMWare is fastest. The beta even has experimental 3D support...

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 4:33:10 PM

^^^^ Dude, you do realiuze the guy in the first link is an avid mac user himself. He was just making that for fun. I still find it funny, But almost nothing is true. The only real point he made was about the DOS and Norton. HOWEVER, with the new mac anf leapord coming out soon, both of those are completely fixed.

For the second one, this is ONLY because microsoft seems to have a monopoly on everything, and everyone os afriad of everything besides Winblows. In fact, I beleive Linux is truly a better gaming system (not sure though, Racer/dj correct me). Macs are awesome. Period.

Pardon my rudeness, I cannot abide useless people.

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 7:58:45 PM

Linux in general runs a good deal faster than windows, but there are far less commercial games that support linux (but many cool open-souce games). So take your pick.

I don't like Macs because the lack of hardware flexibility, the cost, and the OS just doesn't appeal to me. A bit too simplified IMO. But they obviously work well for quite a few people on PTT (^, ^^^^, ^^^^^^, ^^^^^^^, ^^^^^^^^^)

Anyway, I really have no want or need for virtualization, but I might go ahead and try xen since it's free :P

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 8:42:04 PM

Quake 4 for Linux Official FAQ
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars for Linux Pre-order
Nexuiz - Free Online Quake-style FPS

Cedega, run popular windows games under Linux

I wouldn't say gaming on linux is dead. :P Don't forget, many of your favorite game servers are hosted on linux.

Anyhow, let's not make this another OS wars thread.

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 9:46:06 PM

Nice review Flea. I have had my eye on this for some time now, and it is nice to hear a first hand experience. Thanks.

 

 

-Rx

 

 

Saturday, December 09, 2006 at 10:36:28 PM

^^ Not dead, I think it's just starting to wake up ;)

I was just trying to offer some friendly discussion, not start a war, but I guess we should keep the discussion to Parallels.

Flea, if you've ever booted windows instead of running it through Parallels, how much performance is lost by running it through Parallels (if any)?

Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 5:40:47 AM

Nexiuz works for Linux? Duuuuuude...
Racer has a point. In TT, each server shows which OS it runs. You'd be amazed how many servers are hosted on Linux- Dash uses it, and NUTS! Is an avid Slaxor (Slackware user). Me? I use Xubuntu, TT crashes less often on it than on Windows. I used to use Zenwalk, which OWNED. Both consistently play laglessly, fast, and clearly. I have some problems with running AIGLX in the background (Fedora, Mandriva), but on other distros, it's fine- Zenwalk even has its own site for gamers. Next stop: joining the Ubuntu "herd" and beta-testing v7.04.

Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 6:34:07 AM

^ I know that Saint Jimmy is planning on buying a PS3 and then installing Linux onto it.

Pardon my rudeness, I cannot abide useless people.

Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 6:37:11 AM

@ Player:
From my experiences at the mac store ( :( I know ), the comp only loses RAM while using Parallels which is logic.

Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 7:16:57 AM

@ Player
Most of the sites that have reported on Parallels say most processes run at about 95 percent the speed of a real boot up. I believe it. XP on the Mini is as fast as any Windows I have used on PC's. I really was quite floored with the speed, again this was because I was used to emulation in the past. Virtual PC worked but it was not fun. I'll try Bootcamp after I do a good backup :)

(Some reviews say that Windows under Bootcamp on Macs runs faster than on PCs. There is so much "ya buts" in that kind of blanket statement it's hard to take seriously though.)

It's the 3D acceleration that get borked with Parallels. No 3D gaming with Parallels, must use Bootcamp for that, but Coadeweavers is working on an interesting alternate solution for both Linux and Mac.

 

{WalMart free for over 24 months!}

Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 9:36:40 AM

I wouldn't get my hopes up for Codeweavers's solution. So far, the very few games that work are still riddled with all sorts of problems, and pretty much any game with a disc copy protection method - which would be 95-98% of all games - doesn't work. Besides, their solution is mainly meant for office programs and the like. Gaming is only a side project; it's certainly not their main focus.

I'm hoping for Parallels to find a way to access the graphics card. Yes, Bootcamp runs fine and dandy, but having to re-boot over and over again becomes a real nuisance, after a while.

Scrum: wacky, hilarious, chaotic, fun - my favorite

Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 2:06:21 PM

Page : <1> :

insert quote insert url insert email insert image bold italic underline superscript subscript horizontal rule : : Help on using forum codes

Add comment:

HTML is disabled within comments, but ZBB Code is enabled.

Back to the top

Web site designed, maintained and funded by -z- and Dan MacDonald