“A little more than a year ago, I reviewed VMware’s Fusion 1.0 and Parallels Desktop 3.0 to see how they stacked up. Since then, both products have undergone major revisions, so I thought I’d see how this horse race is coming along. Both Fusion, now in Version 2.0.1, and Parallels, in Version 4.0, allow you to run another OS — Windows, Linux, and others — on your Mac as a guest of OS X. They provide what’s called a hypervisor, which can host multiple guest OSes running at the same time,” Phillip J. Windley reports for InfoWorld.
“The most important thing about both of these products is what hasn’t changed: Pick either one, and you’ll get a solid performer that lets you run Windows or Linux on your Mac,” Windley reports. “Both systems offer easy Windows install, and both support even the most taxing Windows applications with aplomb. That said, there are differences between them, and depending on your exact needs, you might find one a better choice than the other.”
Windley reports, “Whether you’re brand-new to the Mac and want the security blanket of bringing your Windows desktop along or you’re a veteran Mac user who needs to run the occasional Windows program, both Parallels and Fusion will suit you well.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: To be precise: “insecurity blanket.”
Ha! Good one MDN! Never saw that one coming
(Just feel like being sarcastic today)
Where is VirtualBox from Sun Microsystems?
Parallels is not worth the money compared to VirtualBox.
Forgive them, for they know not what they are doing
Running Fusion 2.0, Vista and XP.
Works wonderful. Stable as all heck.
Fusion 2 has the ability to “Snapshot” your entire Virtual Machine (other operating systems) so you can revert to a earlier state to avoid glitches.
It also comes with a free anti-virus per VM.
Naturally one should keep Vista and XP from doing anything on the internet except updating the OS and anti-malware definitions.
No Vista 3D candy unfortunately, this includes most games included free with certain Vista versions. (mine is Ultimate)
If there is a Vista update (there isn’t any XP updates anymore) it’s best to wait for the Fusion 2 update before updating Vista.
It’s wise to set Vista processor preferences to two processors, the default is one processor. After updating Vista via their “software update” one processor won’t be enough.
You’ll need more RAM for sure. 4 GB on my Macbook Pro seems to do the trick nicely.
My next computer purchase will be my first PC, a Vista Windows machine, because of the better security and $700 price tag compared to my current $3000 (plus Fusion, Vista and XP, faster hard drive and RAM costs) MacBook Pro.
It’s just smart economics and we are in a recession anyway.
Sorry Apple.
@ Smart Masses
you are a fool to argue this:
“My next computer purchase will be my first PC, a Vista Windows machine, because of the better security …”
I mean you already look stupid arguing for the *less* popular, harder to use Fusion. Then you top it off with the statement that you’re going to ditch your MacBook Pro (the most desirable computer on the planet right now), for a piece of junk running MS Vista 2.0?
Me thinks you should be buying all your friends those “I’m with stupid” TShirts for Christmas.
“To be precise: “insecurity blanket.””
To be precise: The glue that allows your Mac to be your only PC since most people need at least one Windows application for something.
“It’s wise to set Vista processor preferences to two processors, the default is one processor. “
Only if you’re only running one VM at a time. Try having VMware have more total virtual cores active than real ones exist at any time, get ready for it to grind to a halt.
I need to run a one app on Windows (NO Mac alternative exists) and prefer to use Excel 2003 (Numbers is NOT currently up to the task & Excel 2008 SUCKS). With Parallels 4.0 I can use them both seamlessly in a Mac OSX environment. The best of both worlds!
“Insecurity” has nothing to do with it.
The Washington Post had VirtualBox in their comparison.
Works like a charm and it’s free.
“My next computer purchase will be my first PC, a Vista Windows machine, because of the better security …”
Vista is much more secure than XP ever was and for most this is good enough. Since Apple started snitching on their customers by installing Google’s website tracking/anti-phishing/malware software…also EFI. God knows what is installed in there.
I mean you already look stupid arguing for the *less* popular, harder to use Fusion.
I don’t thing he/she was arguing for Fusion, just stating he/she used it.
Then you top it off with the statement that you’re going to ditch your MacBook Pro (the most desirable computer on the planet right now), for a piece of junk running MS Vista 2.0?
I’m sure they said the NEXT computer will be a Vista machine, not saying they would ditch the current MBP.
Only if you’re only running one VM at a time. Try having VMware have more total virtual cores active than real ones exist at any time, get ready for it to grind to a halt.
Actually one can have multiple virtual machines active, it all depends how much processor each one needs at any given time.
If they all need it at once, then naturally whoever is first gets the cores.
I’ve used them both and prefer Fusion.
Anyone having problems with the 10.5.6 update? Article here that I got from Google news. Doesn’t sound good unless it’s propaganda from the dark side.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/mac/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=212500729
QUICK QUESTION TO PARALLELS OWNERS:
If you run Windows in Parallels, do you need to have virus or trojan protection? Since the whole thing is running in a sandbox, theoretically, it shouldn’t go to the OS? However, I just purchased Parallels and wanted to install the Secure Browser and Linux from the Parallels App page. It wouldn’t let me do it, unless I ran from Admin or root. I never do anything, except set up logins from the Admin page. Now, I’m not feeling as safe and I haven’t installed either Linux, Secure browser or Windows.
I guess the question is can you install these apps (os’s) in Parallels in a non-administrative account?
Thanks
The only issues I’ve experienced with VirtualBox have to do with mounting and un-mounting the optical drive. Other than that it’s a pretty slick piece of software. After testing Parallels and VBox I really can’t justify the price tag for Parallels. Hell, I’m even playing around with an Ubuntu install. Everything works. It’s incredible that Sun is able to give VBox away for free.
The more machines Apple sells, the more trolls there seem to be.
Just think what it will be like when Apple hits 20% market share. They will be going crazy. Then 30%, they will be jumping off cliffs.
@Jeremy: You wrote: “I mean you already look stupid arguing for the *less* popular, harder to use Fusion.”
Sorry, I have used both, bought Parallels very early, and worked with it through version 3.0, and then made the switch to Fusion. Even though I occasionally fire up Parallels just to check, I still prefer Fusion over Parallels. I find it both easier and more reliable.
YMMV.
If you run Windows in Parallels, do you need to have virus or trojan protection?
Yes. With Windows XP 1.0 new install (any machine, PC or Mac) you’ll need to have Service Pack 2 already downloaded from a secure machine (Mac or PC, Mac preferred) to install via disk BEFORE hooking Windows XP to the internet or you’ll get instantly OWNED!!
SP2 has a firewall and this needs to be turned on before connecting to the internet for additional updates. It’s preferred to have SP3 and all other XP updates installed via disk before connecting a XP machine to the internet.
Since the whole thing is running in a sandbox, theoretically, it shouldn’t go to the OS?
Virtual software runs other operating systems within a application. It’s possible those other operating systems (and any malware) can alter the memory/disk drive of the computer itself, thus the parent operating system can be altered. OS X has permissions to write to files on the drive, but if your running OS X as a Admin, then a lot more can be altered by malware running in a virtual machine.
However, I just purchased Parallels and wanted to install the Secure Browser and Linux from the Parallels App page. It wouldn’t let me do it, unless I ran from Admin or root. I never do anything, except set up logins from the Admin page. Now, I’m not feeling as safe and I haven’t installed either Linux, Secure browser or Windows.
Parallels itself most likely needs to installed using Admin password while logged in a user account in OS X as it goes in the Application folder in OS X.
One cannot make changes to the Application folder without providing a Admin password if your logged into a OS X user account.
Your cause for alarm is justified naturally as your giving your entire kingdom away with one password. Try logging into OS X Admin account and then trying again.
I guess the question is can you install these apps (os’s) in Parallels in a non-administrative account?
A app that installs via Linux under a virtual software will need a Admin account FOR LINUX.
@MarkR
a few issues….very small ones. I had to sign back on to my google homepage, and do some password tweaks in Mac Mail. Other than that…..no worries
VirtuaBox…. “works like a charm and it’s free”.
Free, but it doesn’t work like a charm for me. I’m one of many (judging from the forums) who can’t get Windoze XP to recognise a USB stick under VirtualBox.
Maybe it’s time to cough up for Fusion.
….. and that should be “VirtualBox”.
@deepdish
Actually I do know what I’m doing.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” /> I have 3 VM’s setup for use as LAMP testbeds (Ubuntu Server), 1 for XP (Visual Studio and .NET, still use it here or there), and 1 general use Linux VM (Ubuntu desktop) for playing around.
I started out using Parallels but got into the Fusion beta, at that time the Fusion beta with debugging turned on was faster then Parallels and didn’t have the annoying “total system freeze” thing that Parallels did if the VM was booting up. Since then I’ve kept with Fusion and am now running the latest version, I still have Parallels sitting around in case I want to go back, I’ve considered getting the latest version and trying it out but Fusion does all I need so I’m not going to bother with it.
I’m currently asking for Parallels for a full refund. After about a month of asking and waiting for them to fix their product, they have now quit updating the ticket and are ignoring the issue, as they consider it an “enhancement”:
When they released 4.0, they broke Kaspersky AV OPSWAT. They’ve acknowledged that it’s now broken, but consider the fix an “enhancement” according to their ticket system, so it’s not getting the attention it needs.
Without OPSWAT, network admission control (NAC) posture validation fails. What this means is that for corporate customers where the network needs to check that you have a current AV engine running, that you’re virus free, etc, you are out of luck if you use the AV product included with Parallels. In other words, you can’t access the corporate network until you purchase a different AV product.
Note that OPSWAT worked in Parallels 3.0 and its included Kaspersky. It also works with a downloaded copy of Kaspersky from http://www.kaspersky.com – it’s only the Parallels-supplied version that is broken. And no, the Parallels license won’t work with the version of Kaspersky directly from that AV vendor.
You are better off buying VMWare Fusion. You get an AV product that works and a bigger library of VM downloads. You also get a more respectable company, both from a company maturity aspect, industry support, customer support, etc. Just do a search for Parallels support and also for VM downloads and you see what I mean.
Sun’s VirtualBox (http://virtualbox.org) is also very, very good, and free for personal use and evaluation. But then you need to get AV…
So, for a lot of corporate customers, this product is a no-go unless you buy extra AV software.
I already have Parallels installed in the admin account. what i want to do is put the apps (linux and the browser) in the virtual space. it’s the admission to the virtual space that is requesting that i do this in a root or admin account. as i stated before, i run nothing from the admin account.
additionally, i chose not to do windows since i am looking to use citrix and all of that virus stuff just scares the crap out of me. i don’t think i need all of that stuff for ubuntu. would be nice if you could confirm. thanks and mucho thanks for the feedback.
/rick
well, i rebooted and it went ahead and installed in the user account. beats me why it didn’t do it yesterday, but it’s there now.
@Fred Plautz and others
My first question, obviously, is, why not use Excel for the Mac?
If you are using such MS-only features such as VB.
The point I want to make is: Why not use Wine?
Excel 2003 for Windows now has platinum status with WineHQ, at least under Ubuntu 8.04. (cf. http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=2736)
Wine doesn’t require a copy of Windows and is quickly evolving to something that supports more and more Windows apps. (Obviously, the Linux world has a greater need for Wine than the Mac world, because many productivity apps have a version that runs natively (hell, that originated) on the Mac -e.g. MS Office, Adobe apps, etc).
You can download a Mac version of Wine from http://www.kronenberg.org/darwine/ (Incidentally, the site also has a standalone version -which includes its own Wine copy- at http://www.kronenberg.org/ies4osx/ it runs really well).
I use VirtualBox, it’s pretty cool and it’s free.
But I use my work Terminal Server all the time through coRD – fast and no need to have Windows clogging up my MacBook Pro HD.