09-18-2011, 04:43 AM

Hey All,

Now that these two applications have released their latest incarnations, have there been any sensible reviews of performance and capability anywhere?

I have read the t1t-for-tat claims and counter-claims by the respective manufacturers, and take what they say with a little pinch of salt, but am looking for something a little more grounded in fact and data without any sales spin.

Is it too early, or have you eagle-eyed folks spotted some comparative reviews?

09-18-2011, 08:40 AM

I haven't seen any objective reviews just yet, but have been an avid user of VMWare Fusion for quite awhile now.

I last used Parallels in version 4 and found it to be lacking in support for Linux. It was also comparatively unstable. In my opinion, Parallels tends to be more bleeding edge and VMWare tends to be more stable. Performance is roughly the same, although Parallels is known for having better/faster 3D support overall (just keep in mind that 3D acceleration is a weak point for all virtualization products - in other words, don't bother if your primary need for Windows is gaming).

VMWare is the forerunner in the virtualization market in general, they've been around the longest and their products are used in everything from workstation to full-on server virtualization in large enterprise environments. I would say that if stability is your priority, don't bother with Parallels.

Another option to consider is the free/open source VirtualBox, which is evolving rapidly and giving both Parallels and VMWare a run for their money.

09-19-2011, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by encayoh

Hey All,

Now that these two applications have released their latest incarnations, have there been any sensible reviews of performance and capability anywhere?

I have read the t1t-for-tat claims and counter-claims by the respective manufacturers, and take what they say with a little pinch of salt, but am looking for something a little more grounded in fact and data without any sales spin.

Is it too early, or have you eagle-eyed folks spotted some comparative reviews?

here is a nice review that I've just found... hope it helps!
LifeinTECH - Blog - Fusion 4 vs Parallels 7 - Which is*Better?

09-20-2011, 09:12 AM

I think that post is slightly misleading and possibly based on older versions of the products. I use VMs extensively on Macs and have each version of Parallels and Fusion and switched back and forth a few times.

Parallels was a lot less stable at v4 but not so with later versions. I would regularly experience CPU issues with VMWare Fusion 3 that were never fully resolved through its whole lifetime. Others on their forums also experienced the same issues with no solutions.

In comparison Parallels 6 was faster and more stable. I'll get both again in a few weeks, I'll wait until Parallels sort out their full screen issue with version 7 (should be the next patch for it) and until a few Fusion reviews appear.

I know VMWare are the market leaders but I found they didn't pay that much attention to Fusion and they never answered any of my support queries.

09-20-2011, 10:46 AM

To the above poster - surprised to hear about your support issues with Fusion. My experience over the years has been to the absolute contrary - Parallels support was essentially non-existent and Fusion support, particularly the forums, were outstanding. Oh well, I guess individual mileage may vary!

In my experience, the two platforms are sufficiently indistinguishable for a single-user installation of Windows that it really makes no difference as a practical matter for the vast majority of people. Their interfaces have different "feels" and one may seem more intuitive than the other. Both are sufficiently stable, both have excellent features, both support 3D graphics sufficient for casual use and light games, and NEITHER support it well enough for heavy or cutting-edge gaming, or for professional video or photo applications.

That has been largely true about these products for almost 2 years in my opinion, and the latest versions will only make both of them better but (barring some glitch in one or the other which would likely be quickly fixed) will not change the overall view. Support at both ranges from adequate to excellent, depending on individual perspectives about what constitutes good support.

VirtualBox lags behind both products in some features but is also quite stable, has excellent support and has the singular positive of being free.

I note, however, that if you are going to go beyond a single-user Windows install, and plan to use your VM for development purposes or to install other operating systems (e.g., Linux), VM Ware is demonstrably superior in its capabilities and support for those systems.

But for a single user Windows install, you can't make a "wrong" choice IMO. I would not stress about it.

Cheers

09-20-2011, 11:03 AM

Thank you for replies.

There doesn't seem to be much to choose between them, as ever, so I followed the advice within the linked article that Calydus found, and have ordered Fusion, based on the reasonable introductory price.

K

09-25-2011, 01:23 AM

I have used 3 since it came out and am happy with its performance. I am also personally not convinced that it is time to upgrade to Lion yet. I would like to hear from someone that has used 3 and has now upgraded to 4:
Were there any problems in the actual installation of the upgrade?
How do you find the performance of 4 vs 3?
Is there a learning curve?
Any other information from your experience would be much appreciated - its not the cost but rather the headaches I'm worried about : )
thanks in advance

09-29-2011, 07:20 PM

Im in need of one of these programs almost solely for CAD like operations. (2D and 3D) and some mathematical projection software. Can anyone here make a recommendation?

I have 8 gigs of 1333MHz DDR3 ram and a core i7 2.2ghz and an AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB if that helps