“For instance, while I am writing this column on a Mac laptop in the Mac OS, using the Mac version of Microsoft Word, I am also simultaneously running the latest versions of Internet Explorer and Outlook—which aren’t available for the Mac—in Windows, on the same machine,” Mossberg reports. “I can switch back and forth among these programs with ease.”
“Now, the two most popular software products for accomplishing this feat, Parallels and VMware Fusion, have been updated to run faster, and to support the latest versions of the two operating systems, Apple’s Snow Leopard and Microsoft’s Windows 7,” Mossberg reports. “Each costs $80 and requires a Mac running an Intel processor.”
“I’ve been comparing these latest versions, called Parallels Desktop 5 and VMware Fusion 3, using each to run Windows 7 on the same Mac laptop powered by Snow Leopard,” Mossberg reports. “My verdict is that, after falling behind Fusion for awhile, Parallels is now the best choice again. In my tests, it proved to be both faster, and more capable of handling the heavy-duty visual effects in Windows 7.”
Mossberg reports, “Neither of these programs is the answer for Mac owners who want to run the latest heavy-duty games or other graphics-intensive programs in Windows 7. For them, I recommend either Boot Camp or a separate Windows PC. But, if you’re looking to run typical, everyday Windows programs on a Mac without rebooting, Parallels 5 is now the best solution.”
Read the full review, which includes a video, here.
Why do these folks not even take a look at CodeWeavers’ CrossOver? An unspoken bias against any product which has ties to free & open source software like Wine?
So if your forced to use IE because companies continue to support the Windows/IE/Active-x/.net/aspx to further extend the monopoly, Parallels is the way to go.
I have lost all reasons to run Windows, even virtually. I hear singing…
Because CrossOver is buggy and incompatible with a whole lot of software. In other words, its nice for geeks and bad for the average user.
Does anyone have any recommendations as far as the best method to play PC games in a Windows environment on a Mac? Is it Boot Camp, or a program like Parallels? My assumption would be that Boot Camp might offer the best performance. Any thoughts?
Guy Jones,
Boot Camp. No question. Native vs. virtualization.
Walt, Walt, Walt… “simultaneously running the latest versions of Internet Explorer and Outlook—which aren’t available for the Mac—in Windows” ??
I see you are using the web without protection again. Remember what your doctor said about that the last time!
@Guy Jones
Stick with bootcamp since parallels only allows up to 256MB of video ram.. so if you have a game that requires more then you are screwed.. or if you only have 256 you can use all of it.. but it will run like crap.. assuming it runs. But you can do bootcamp and then install parallels so you can install games or use other apps while in OS X and not have to reboot to windows. Thats what I set with my mac pro and windows 7
Hmm, interesting. I’ve used both Parallels and Fusion, and Parallels was so slow it was nigh on unusable, whereas Fusion runs like a dream. That’s probably just my Mac though. Plus, I like some of the features of Fusion over Parallels.
no – best choice is actually VirtualBox
Windows is worth $0
Why pay money to run it virtually when you can pay $0 for VirtualBox and run it
The speed benchmarks are misleading
Try VirtualBox Mossberg and then get back to us
It is fast stable and by the way, free
Who needs extensive totally seamless intertwined Mac and Windows app windows anyways?
Nobody. Unless you want to bring the BSOD to the Mac world
Nobody
Uncle Walt’s conclusion parallels what I heard, and I am running VMware Fusion 3. But I will stick with Fusion, perhaps because I am invested in it. One thing Walt did not mention, but something I have heard here frequently, is that the customer support from Parallels is abysmal. My customer support experience with Fusion has been good. And given that you would be using either application to run Windows, trust me when I saw you’ll need all the help you can get!
@Dave:
Actually, the one time I had to call Parallels tech support, they were very helpful. They charged $35 for a tech support call, even though I had just bought the software; but they stayed on the phone with me for hours (three separate calls) until the problem was completely resolved. The $35 charge was chickensh*t, but they did provide expert support.
Mossberg is giving us his verdict on the fastest one, not the cheapest. The speed benchmarks are NOT misleading, VirtualBox IS SLOWER than Parallels and Fusion. Not to say it isn’t a good piece of software, it is.
I’m just being curious here, but say you’re happy with windows XP: is there really such a big difference when using Fusion or Parallels? I mean, I know I don’t need Winodws 7 for what I do, and I need Windows something like 10 mins/month.
I’ve always found Parallels to be faster than Fusion. It’s too bad that they try to integrate Windows in to Mac OS X too much for my liking. I want my Windows environment to be as sandboxed as possible. I don’t want to right click a file in OS X and be presented with dozens of Windows apps under “Open with”. Fusion makes turning off all that integration easy. Parallels doesn’t. That’s the primary reason I use Fusion instead.
Well, I tried both, and of course Virtualbox, Winebottler and Crossover for mac.
I agree that Wine is more something for geeks, it’s buggy and lacks compatibility for many programs, still it is worth a try – I like the idea behind the project, and even I don’t use it anymore, I don’t regret the money I gave to codeweavers.
Virtualbox is surely the way you want to go if you don’t want to spend money, and has a bright future I think. Definitely worth a try.
Fusion 3, well… I wanted to import a complete PC for a friend (that’s a new feature in version 3), and it was buggy and not very well documented, stopped several times around in the middle (after 20GB over LAN), without giving any notification that it actually stopped (I could only see when checking the traffic). After the third try it worked fine, but it left some 80GB of hidden permitted files behind, from the failed imports. That even didn’t go away after correctly uninstalling Fusion, I had to kill the files in the terminal. Not very user friendly. After a while the Unity look just suddenly didn’t work anymore – the forum of VMware is full with complaints about that one. And yes, it started up the virtual machine much slower than Parallels 5 or Virtualbox, so for me, it was a huge disappointment (when running, it was about the same windows-speed like Parallels, but all Mac apps were running much slower, so don’t watch your 30’000 photos in iPhoto while Fusion is active). Also getting on my nerves a Fusionhelper which is in the startup and eating ressources.
So I agree with Mossberg, if you want a Mac-like userfriendly, non-invasive virtual machine, Parallels 5 is the way to go. Don’t forget to change the skins (Mac look), and on the net you will also find somewhere cursors in Mac style, so you won’t be too much reminded that windows is running there in the background…
Go visit VMWare community forums.
Reviews such as this (and there are more, favouring Parallels), have caused the Fusion team to admit, flat out, that they’ve fallen behind the curve and have lost focus.
What this means for Fusion is anyone’s guess, but they themselves admit they are not competing well.
P.S.
The Fusion team even stated publicly that they don’t even own a new iMac!
For the lazy;
http://communities.vmware.com/thread/253017?tstart=0
I have Win7 Ultimate running on my 17″ Macbook Pro through Bootcamp. But every time I go there, I’m always worried that I’m going to hit upon a malicious website that’s going to infect my computer. I’d like to learn more about Win7, but I can’t shake that uneasy feeling that at any moment my computer will go looking for credit card numbers to send back to Russia.
I spend the vast majority of my computer time with Snow Leopard.
Thanks for the mention of CrossOver Mac. We know our product isn’t perfect, but it does run many different applications, and saves Mac users from needing a copy of Windows. Wine (the underlying technology) does improve constantly as well, meaning that many apps that don’t run now will most likely run eventually. We’re not a silver bullet yet, though–we know that. It’s good to have goals in life, I guess…
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Cheers,
-jon parshall-
COO
http://www.codeweavers.com
“Your Mac/Windows Solution”