Parallels has released Workstation 2.1 Beta6 for Mac OS X which offers users a number of important features, including:
• OS Support: Use any version of Windows (3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, Me, 2000, NT, XP, 2003), any Linux distribution, FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2, eComStation, or MS-DOS in secure virtual machines running alongside Mac OS X.
• Performance: Driven by full support for dual-core processors and Intel Virtualization Technology (included in almost every new Intel-powered Mac), virtual machines created using Parallels Workstation 2.1 Beta6 offer near-native performance and rock-solid stability.
• Ease of Use: Download the program and install it with a single click. Build a virtual machine in seconds using helpful wizards. Configure virtual machines using a simple web-inspired interface.
• Works on any Intel-powered Mac: Any Intel Powered Macintosh running OS X 10.4.4 or higher is compatible with Parallels Workstation 2.1.
Major Beta6 Fixes Include:
• USB fixes (more devices supported: PDA, scanner, etc.)
• Shared Folders fixes (added support for guest Windows 2000)
• Network improvements: host-only networking
• Custom video resolutions support added
• Image Tool introduced
• Autoupdate introduced
• Kernel panic in virtual memory manager fixed
• Shutdown in fullscreen mode hang fixed
• Virtual disk sync problem with Linux guests fixed
More info and download link (18.2MB) here.
Advertisements:
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
It’s just like having your own Bizarro World inside Mac OS X!
HEY, more options…….Life will be grand? I think!
Does this imply we can do more Windows than Windows users?
Can this be done now on PC’s?
• OS Support: Use any version of Windows (3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, Me, 2000, NT, XP, 2003), any Linux distribution, FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2, eComStation, or MS-DOS in secure virtual machines running alongside Mac OS X.
Can someone clear this up for me.
This kind of stuff rocks! I can’t wait to run AutoCAD (my favorite program) at native speed on my new Mac. (I’m due for a new one . . . my iMac is 4 years old) (glad I waited)
Yes, NCG598, this can already be done on today’s PCs. But, the one thing today’s PCs cannot do is run OS X.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
Mac VM: Are you sure a standard issue, current generation PC can run all those older versions of Windows, including 3.1? Something tells me there might be some hardware problems, and perhaps driver problems with all the older software and newer peripherals, etc… (USB comes to mind.)
I know if you set up a ‘virtual’ machine, you can make it emulate any virtual hardware setup and have it work, thus leading to increased stablility due to ‘set’ configurations, as compared to the actual variables in real life hardware combinations… which is why VirtualPC ran Windows in a more stable environment <yeah, slower…> than typical native setups.
But, have to agree, the MacOS X benefit is the real killer…
re: huh?
definitely there would be hardware issues running pre-win95 osr2 (man, i remember that?) with usb or agp devices. that’s why PCs still have ps/2 ports (which an IBM 286 down in my basement has…) – it’s so a brand new dual-core 3.8ghz pentium D can run lotus 1-2-3 in MS-DOS 3.3… from a floppy drive, which undoubtedly came installed with this “cutting-edge” 2006 machine. those probably both reside on an 8-bit ISA bus, too…
mw: gave. as in, macs gave up floppies eight years ago, along with their legacy connectivity (ADB). why can’t PCs?
after i wrote that post, i remembered that some BIOSes (heh) have USB legacy mode, where your USB keyboard and maybe mouse work in BIOS/DOS/Win3x. still, PCs that ship today don’t seem to come with USB keyboards and mice – still PS/2! sad that they could actually shave a bit off their production costs by getting rid of those ports and the chipset that supports it. but they just HAVE to hang on to that whole idea of “well, what if someone WANTS to run windows 3.11 on their athlon 64fx chip?”
then again, it’s the most secure version of windows you can use today. =P
MW: former. as in, can you tell i’m a FORMER ms user?
Stop the pop up keyword ad already, how low will you stoop!?
24 advertisements on this page.
MDN is really starting to suck balls.
mw: attack
As in, I’ll attack the next person to tell me their keyword
..
oah, and to stay on topic. I have used PCs for the last 15 years.. and finally, it looks like my next computer will be a Mac
Seems a lot of sites are reverting to this method of annoying advertising.
I see it like this, sites are in buisness to make money.
If certain ads annoy you, rather than leave, just take a few corrective steps to disable them.
This way you keep coming to MDN and view a few ads at least.
This guy has written a short guide
homepage.mac.com/hogfish/Personal25.html
I put Windows on my Mac and then removed it. It just did not seem right to me. Windows did work find but I keep finding myself thinking about it as I was using it. Maybe I’m wack-o or just did not give myself enough time. I use Windows all the time on a cheap eMachine.
Nice to see the great progress they’re making!
Announcing their product the day after Apple announce Boot Camp seemed like just a knee jerk® but they really are committed.
Running a virtual Windblows or Windblows apps sans Windblows is definitely the way to go versus dual booting up that shit. This can only help Leopard by the way.
wonder why anybody isn’t working on going the other way? i.e. installing OS X on a Dull?
“wonder why anybody isn’t working on going the other way? i.e. installing OS X on a Dull?”
The problem is that Apple makes their Mac OS X for Intel so that it can’t run on generic PC hardware. It uses hardware-based anti-piracy measures. You have to crack it using something by maxxuss.
I’ve done it on my Windows box though – just install VMWare for Windows, then download a hacked MAC OX x86 install DVD from a torrent site like http://www.piratebay.se or http://www.seedler.org. The problem is that graphics acceleration is impossible, just like as is the case with Parallels, but Mac OS X without graphics acceleration is crappy. The dock is choppy, moving windows around is choppy, expose is choppy, widgets is choppy. Ugh.
You can install the hacked Mac OS X stuff on PC hardware that uses the Intel integrated graphics, and you will get graphics acceleration if you have just the right hardware.
It’s really not worth the trouble. Trust me.
Supposely Vista is not going to have the fancy graphics and Exposé like behavior unless it has a DirectX graphics cards. OpenGL will run on top of DirectX at much less performance. This will of course make for some interesting lack of progress running Vista apps natively.
I’ve got bootcamp installed on my MBP and now parallels. Lets just say that bootcamp is getting removed. Parallels works great and does everything that I need it to. It blows away virtual PC. It’s fast and so easy to use. Yes it still needs some improvements but even in it’s present form it’s the best solution for me. Funny how it takes a third party to get it right.
I’ve been playing with Parallels, and I’d sad to see that Windows XP isn’t running dual-core inside Parallels – it does through Boot Camp of course. I get far better performance in Boot Camp, since it has graphics acceleration and dual-core support. Booting takes far longer in Parallels as well.
Nick said:
“I get far better performance in Boot Camp…”
Well der! Bootcamp has full and sole use of the hardware.
Talk about stating the bleeding obvious!
“Well der! Bootcamp has full and sole use of the hardware.
Talk about stating the bleeding obvious!”
Right, but many people are suggesting that Parallels is offering performance that is just about as good as booting directly into Windows, and I was trying to clarify that.
Single-threaded pure CPU performance is actually pretty much on-par with boot camp (not surprising), but since Parallels doesn’t use both cores, multithreaded performance suffers. Anything i/o suffers the abstraction layer of the filesystem, and of course you can forget about good directX graphics performance. On the whole, if you are just web browsing you probably won’t be able to tell a difference between Parallels and Boot Camp!
Hope this helps make it more clear for some people…