Parallel Vs vmWare Fusion

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38
Parallel Vs vmWare Fusion

Hi:

Has anybody do a comparison between Parallel desktop and vmWare Fusion. I was told by the kid in Apple store that Fusion is better and utilize both processor where as Paralle can only use one. I also noticed the other post about the nightmare with parallel and XP. I am currently using Bootcamp. It works great. I was think of either Fusion or Parallel for the occasional quick need to launch a window app in X and the ability to do so without rebooting.

Thanks

Dr. Webster's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 10 min ago
Joined: Dec 19 2003 - 17:34
I'm using Fusion because it s

I'm using Fusion because it supports standard VMWare disk image files. I use a lot of VMWare stuff at work, and really like the way they make software.

Reverend Darkness's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 8 months ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38
Fusion

Currently, I'm recommending Fusion... better use of resources, as well as an understanding of network home folders.

Parallels currently has a problem with network home folders... still investigating that, though.

tmtomh's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 20 2003 - 10:38
Me Too

Ditto - I like Fusion. Dead easy to set up, doesn't use a ton of resources, allows you to use one or two virtual CPU cores, and interacts with Mac devices (USB ports, CD/DVD drive, etc.) very nicely.

The only glitch I've found with Fusion so far is that if you try to set up a virtual machine for Win 2000 Pro, it defaults to assuming a SCSI hard drive, and the Win2k installer won't work. The fix is easy - just tell Fusion you're setting up the VM for WinXP and it will assume an IDE HD, and then install Win2k - all will be well!

Best,
Matt

moosemanmoo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: Aug 17 2004 - 15:24
I use VMWare because it has t

I use VMWare because it has the best performance. I also wouldn't feel right giving money to a company as shady as SWSoft.

Offline
Last seen: 8 years 4 months ago
Joined: Dec 15 2007 - 21:44
Prefer Parallels

I've used Parallels, Fusion, and Boot Camp on various machines to run XP. Boot Camp is certainly the fastest approach, but a dedicated partition for it does not appeal to me. With the other two choices, I found Parallels easier to use and faster than Fusion in running XP. It has been trouble-free for me.

Offline
Last seen: 10 years 1 month ago
Joined: Dec 12 2005 - 07:34
I use both and prefer Parallels

VMware is probably better for enterprise users who need the interoperability features with all the other VMware stuff.

For consumers, however, I would definitely recommend Parallels. It has thoughtful features that make it more convenient for regular users, such as the smartselect thingy which lets you set the default handler application for BOTH platforms. eg you can set it so you open a .doc in Mac OS and it opens it in Windows Word, or set web controls so mailto: links clicked in Windows will still open in Apple Mail or what have you.

It takes integration to the next level. Way cool Smile

Log in or register to post comments