Running parallels on new macbook

Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Birmingham, AL
I just got my first mac, a macbook, and would like to run windows xp on Parallels desktop 5. Is anyone else doing this? Are there any performance issue running this setup on a macbook?
 

Raz0rEdge

Well-known member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
15,745
Reaction score
2,071
Points
113
Location
MA
Your Mac's Specs
2022 Mac Studio M1 Max, 2023 M2 MBA
What are the specs on the Macbook? Lots of people are doing this, but perhaps with VMWare Fusion or VirtualBox (the other 2 Virutalization software). Running WinXP inside a VM is always going to be of lesser performance than running it natively..

Regards
 
OP
KRAKALACKIN
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Birmingham, AL
What are the specs on the Macbook? Lots of people are doing this, but perhaps with VMWare Fusion or VirtualBox (the other 2 Virutalization software). Running WinXP inside a VM is always going to be of lesser performance than running it natively..

Regards

My specs are 2.26Ghz Core2Duo and 2Gbs DDR3 RAM. On my PCs I use VMware but parallels looks really good.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Your Mac's Specs
15" MBPro (mid 2009) 3.06Ghz 8GB RAM 500MB 7200RPM NVIDIA GeForce9400GT 512MB RAM
My guess is that it is going to vary depending on what you do. I have a pretty much top of the line MBP (3.06GHz, 8GB RAM 15" model) and tried both Parallels 5 and VMWare Fusion 3.0 when I first got my MBP back in December. Parallels was so convincingly better for the way I use it that it is hard for me to understand why anyone would use VMWare on the surface. Performance, stability and tools all were better on Parallels. The lone place VMWare stood out was migration. I'm in the software industry though and I am well aware that different users have different requirements so that is just what was better for me. I am running Windows XP, Windows 7 Ultimate and a beta version of Chromium in Parallels and things were great.

I don't know if Parallels is offered as a demo but VMWare is so you can try it and see if it meets your needs.

Also, Windows performance shouldn't be substantially different from what it would be running on any other PC as this is virtualization and not emulation. In reality it is running natively with the specs you configure. My understanding is that there is some slight trick being played with the video card that keeps it from running exactly as it would natively but I haven't done enough research on it to tell you. I can say for sure that Windows XP and Windows 7 both have outstanding performance on my config. I have a similarly spec'd PC running Windows 7 Ultimate and cannot tell any difference at all.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
236
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
Oxford, UK
I have used both over several years and prefer Parallels, especially version 5.

I run Windows 2000, XP, Vista and Windows 7 via Parallels.

The more RAM you have the better.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
47
Points
48
Your Mac's Specs
2.8 GHz 15" MacBook Pro OS X 10.7.x & some old Macs
I just got my first mac, a macbook, and would like to run windows xp on Parallels desktop 5. Is anyone else doing this? Are there any performance issue running this setup on a macbook?
Whether you use Parallels or Fusion they both in a sense divide your computer into two computers which means that you can't use your computer to it's fullest power on either Mac or Windows. This is usually not a problem unless you are using intensive programs such as the latest video games at the highest graphics settings.

This is why Boot Camp was invented so that you can boot into Windows rather than dividing your computer's power with Parallels. Although like I said for most people this is not an issue because most likely you are going to run non-intensive software. The trick I've learned is to not give Parallels/Fusion more system resources then it is necessary to run your Windows software. Giving it too much resources will slow down your computer because you Mac still needs some in order to work well. Upgrading to more RAM will help. I use Fusion with XP by the way but Parallels is good too.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2007
Messages
452
Reaction score
9
Points
18
Location
Canada
Your Mac's Specs
Macbook Pro, 2.4GHz Core2 Duo 10.6.8, MacMini
I have a mini and am running Parallels 5.0. This release is finally good! You can download a trial. I have, pre 5.0, heard that other virtualizations were better. Not sure now how they compare but I like 5.0 much better then I did previous versions. The programs I use are quite simple so your mileage may vary. I also don't tend to use intensive programs on the pc side and don't keep it attached to the net, have done maybe 1 initial update (when I had PC only, I only did critical updates and had fewer problems than when I did updates as per constant ms request using xp also)

Good luck

I just got my first mac, a macbook, and would like to run windows xp on Parallels desktop 5. Is anyone else doing this? Are there any performance issue running this setup on a macbook?
 
OP
KRAKALACKIN
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Birmingham, AL
Whether you use Parallels or Fusion they both in a sense divide your computer into two computers which means that you can't use your computer to it's fullest power on either Mac or Windows. This is usually not a problem unless you are using intensive programs such as the latest video games at the highest graphics settings.

This is why Boot Camp was invented so that you can boot into Windows rather than dividing your computer's power with Parallels. Although like I said for most people this is not an issue because most likely you are going to run non-intensive software. The trick I've learned is to not give Parallels/Fusion more system resources then it is necessary to run your Windows software. Giving it too much resources will slow down your computer because you Mac still needs some in order to work well. Upgrading to more RAM will help. I use Fusion with XP by the way but Parallels is good too.

Last night I installed Virtualbox and installed xp on it and it works great. So what does fusion or parallels have to office over virtualbox. Virtualbox being free and fusion and parallels being about $80
 

pigoo3

Well-known member
Staff member
Admin
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
44,210
Reaction score
1,418
Points
113
Location
U.S.
Your Mac's Specs
2017 15" MBP, 16gig ram, 1TB SSD, OS 10.15
Last night I installed Virtualbox and installed xp on it and it works great. So what does fusion or parallels have to office over virtualbox. Virtualbox being free and fusion and parallels being about $80

Some folks on Mac-Forums swear by "Virtual Box"...and like you said it's FREE!:)

If virtual box does everything you need Windows to do...save the $80 bucks.

- Nick
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
47
Points
48
Your Mac's Specs
2.8 GHz 15" MacBook Pro OS X 10.7.x & some old Macs
Last night I installed Virtualbox and installed xp on it and it works great. So what does fusion or parallels have to office over virtualbox. Virtualbox being free and fusion and parallels being about $80
I have never used VirtualBox so I can't say. The difference probably comes from features and performance, but if it's working for you then use it until it doesn't work well for you anymore. ;)
 

Shop Amazon


Shop for your Apple, Mac, iPhone and other computer products on Amazon.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Top