03-04-2008, 01:31 PM

Regardless of what ive said before on some of my threads im coming round to the idea of a full switch. Basically the more I play and learn the more I love.

Im looking at full switch but still need some windows software and boot camp is not convenient enough.

looking at fusion or parallels to run vista or XP if required. Has anyone any experience.

Also one of the business packages that i use in windows allows me to generate reports directly into MS word. I wonder how this sort of scenario would work on a dual systems. Will the report link into Mac word or Windows word ???

Some feedback would be great. Thanks

03-04-2008, 01:56 PM

I always recommend VMware. It has more robust support all around including DX9 and seems to run faster. It also will make for easier transitions if you ever feel like moving your VM from your mac to a different machine and want to run it with VMware server or workstation on say a PC.

Unity mode in VMware also works better then the parallels equivalent for me.

03-04-2008, 02:44 PM

I have (and use) both.

I used to find Fusion to be better, but the latest version of Parallels has narrowed/extinguished the gap.

Parallels only supports Vista and XP, while Fusion supports them and Win 2000, 98, 95 etc plus Linux, Solaris etc.

03-04-2008, 03:30 PM

I have not used both products so I can't comment on which one is better, but I have been using Parallels for a little over a year now and have had only a few minor issues with it, and no issues at all recently.

I would like to point out though that Parallels does indeed support more than just Win XP and Vista. I have it running Win2K, XP, Vista, Fedora 8, Ubuntu, and OpenSUSE.

As I said, I can't give you an opinion on which is better, I can only tell you about my mostly positive experience with Parallels.

03-04-2008, 04:13 PM

I am evaluating Fusion at the moment as I've seen so many recommendations for it here. In comparing the two side-by-side, Parallels is certainly more refined - particularly in terms of how it handles screen resolution changes and transitions. Although Fusion claims to support DX9, none of my games seem to think it does, despite the fact that I enabled it in the VM config. I'm guessing there's something going on with the driver, but in Parallels, enabling 3D support is as simple as checking a box.

So, right now, I'm leaning toward letting the evaluation expire. I was really hoping to see better game support and superior performance (particularly since it supports 64-bit and multi-core processors), but I'd say they're about even, and in some cases Parallels is more refined.

03-04-2008, 04:26 PM

I use Parallels 3 for XP, Ubuntu, and Solaris and have not had a problem. It was the first one I tried and (I believe) the first one out for Intel Mac's VM users.

At this point I think the debate has gone the direction of Canon v Nikon...use whichever one you particular find useful. I doubt you could go wrong with either.

Kat

03-04-2008, 04:41 PM

OK guys..... thanks. I think ill go for an olympus then. LOL

03-04-2008, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by MacKat

I use Parallels 3 for XP, Ubuntu, and Solaris and have not had a problem. It was the first one I tried and (I believe) the first one out for Intel Mac's VM users.

At this point I think the debate has gone the direction of Canon v Nikon...use whichever one you particular find useful. I doubt you could go wrong with either.

Kat

I agree with this - I started with Parallels, used the VM Fusion 'trial' but stuck with Parallels. Fusion has a few advantages, in regard to using both cores etc, however Parallels is a little easier to get to grips with and I prefer its coherence mode to anything on Fusion.

I use it for XP SP 2 and SuSE Linux.

03-04-2008, 08:40 PM

I just started using Parallels 3.0. It took three attempts before XP finally installed without freezing. I had some problems initallly with Photoshop Elements 4 when it was first installed. It appears to be fine now. XP recognized my Brother printer as an HP. It also appears to work regardless of the mis-identification. I am very happy with how Parallels manages two OS's at the same time as with how XP loads faster than it does on my PC. I have not tried any other products to compare.

03-05-2008, 03:05 AM

Originally Posted by quantumdrift

I would like to point out though that Parallels does indeed support more than just Win XP and Vista. I have it running Win2K, XP, Vista, Fedora 8, Ubuntu, and OpenSUSE.

My mistake - sorry.

I have never gone past Parallels first screen for installing a new OS, so did not read it correctly.

03-05-2008, 04:44 PM

Vmware

03-05-2008, 07:10 PM

I've read a number of posts pointing out the more favorable licensing terms of VMware, if that matters to you.

03-06-2008, 12:07 PM

I use Fusion and am quite happy with it expect for the following pet peeves:

1. Audio is choppy when played in Fusion. My MBP has 4 GB RAM of which 2 GB is allocated to running Vista within Fusion.
2. No support for external Firewire drives.

03-06-2008, 12:22 PM

Do both require "full retail versions" of XP? I have Enterprise copies at work and I can't use them with bootcamp and I chatted with a VMWare person last night and she said I need FRV for Fusion. Does Parrallels require this as well or can I use an Enterprise copy of WinXp with Parallels?

Thanks.

03-08-2008, 02:23 PM

I tried both Parallels and Fusion and settled on Fusion. Seemed easier to use and faster to me. I think Unity mode and Coherence are about the same. But YMMV and, for all practical purposes, they are essentially even. I don't do gaming so will leave that to others (and if I did, would use bootcamp anyway).

Re the last post, I used an OEM copy of XP. Our enterprise product key would not work (but who knows, yours might). In any case, an OEM version of XP works fine and is much cheaper than the retail version.

Cheers