PDA

View Full Version : Windows Virtualization on Intel Macs


Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Apr 6, 2006, 07:15 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Parallels released (http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/) their Windows virtualization solution for the Intel Mac today. The product is called Parallels Workstation 2.1 Beta and a free fully functional copy is available for download now (http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/).

Unlike Apple's Boot Camp solution, Parallels solution allows you to run Windows XP (and other Intel-based operating systems) from within Mac OS X. Rebooting or Dual Booting is not required. This allows users to maintain their daily environment while also being able to use any desired Windows applications. It is only available for the Intel Macs and should provide near-native performance.

Parallels Workstation 2.1 Beta for Mac OS X is NOT simply a "dual-boot" solution; rather, it empowers users the ability to use Windows, Linux and any other operating system at the same time as Mac OS X, enabling users to enjoy the comfort of their Mac OS X desktop while still being able to use critical applications from other OSes.

Parallels appears to be taking advantage of the Intel Virtualization Technology (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/12/20051221214050.shtml) which was included in the Intel Yonah processors that are now shipping in the Intel Macs.

Arnaud
Apr 6, 2006, 07:18 AM
That's already better than a boot-solution...
At least you can keep the whole OsX in the background for all tasks !

A.

(First post !)

Cinematographer
Apr 6, 2006, 07:18 AM
Definitely much better a solution than Boot Camp.

Chaszmyr
Apr 6, 2006, 07:20 AM
Are the video drivers sufficient for running a game? if not, can the Boot Camp drivers some how be used?

iBunny
Apr 6, 2006, 07:21 AM
AMAZING!

Both Soultions are great!! Now, Boot camp offers native enviroment for gaming!!! And the Virtulization offers the ability to run windows within the Mac OS!!!


w000t

Steve Jobs, I never thought I would say it but thank you for opening up this opportunity. Now , I only have to buy 1 computer.... and its a Mac.!!!!

Macheath_Messer
Apr 6, 2006, 07:23 AM
Now this is interesting (at least for me). I would love to be able to run XP within a window for those 2 programs I need it for, instead of having to reboot. I haven't gotten the chance to look at this yet, but I wonder if it will include direct support for video cards (thus allowing the use of DirectX)?

Wow, some exciting times here the last couple days. :D

FWIW,

Mackie

skillz1318
Apr 6, 2006, 07:23 AM
yeah, i want to install xp for gaming purposes...which would run games better you think, boot camp or virtualization? im thinking boot camp...

Thanks

paulchen
Apr 6, 2006, 07:25 AM
Please tell me that it is impossible to use os x on a windows pc. If not, good night apple.

50548
Apr 6, 2006, 07:26 AM
Parallel's solution seems wonderful indeed, as I loathe any possibility of booting Winblows...it's more like a native speed VirtualPC...very promising.

backspinner
Apr 6, 2006, 07:26 AM
Woot! Now this is good news for business users! Apple will get a grip on the corporate IT budgets.

andiwm2003
Apr 6, 2006, 07:28 AM
great, thats more like it. no dual boot.

the only question is how viruses will behave under this system. maybe there is a simple and safe solution to this (aside of not using windows!)?

mcadam
Apr 6, 2006, 07:30 AM
Wow - seems we are experiencing a virtual tsunami of windows on mac these days... Gawd damn I'm curious to see some benchmarks soon. If this will open up for all the lovely 3d and other design apps (Ooh Rhino, app of my dreams) that has never been made for a mac I'm a happy guy... but it does demand that it works, more or less, at native speed as promised.


Please tell me that it is impossible to use os x on a windows pc. If not, good night apple.

It is impossible to use os x on a windows pc.

A

galstaph
Apr 6, 2006, 07:30 AM
Hopefully the virtualization box keeps the beast fully contained, someone needs to compare this benchmark-wise with boot camp


originally posted by mcadam
It is impossible to use os x on a windows pc.
not quite, but it is not recommended and isn't fully functional (i.e. it is hacked to work)

hd78
Apr 6, 2006, 07:31 AM
Thank You (God or whoever) for bootcamp and this. PC hardware will be the best for the money if everything goes well in my opinion.

DTphonehome
Apr 6, 2006, 07:32 AM
Sheesh, this is all happening so fast! I'd like to see performance of this virtualization scheme...how are graphics, and are all the device drivers included? Can you just use Apple's own driver set (which Boot Camp gives you)?

Platform
Apr 6, 2006, 07:32 AM
Amazing...just hope for the people with Intel Mac's that the drivers from Boot Camp will work..:eek: :cool:

Cinematographer
Apr 6, 2006, 07:33 AM
Please tell me that it is impossible to use os x on a windows pc. If not, good night apple.

It is impossible. It has been tried before, but you don't get a stable system. More crashes than Windows 3.1 :rolleyes: And: it's illegal.

DTphonehome
Apr 6, 2006, 07:34 AM
Please tell me that it is impossible to use os x on a windows pc. If not, good night apple.

Well, it is possible, but only a hardcore group of enthusiasts have actually done it, so it isn't supported in any way. And forget your average PC user doing that install. Also, the hacked version of OS X is both illegal and often a couple steps behind the current Apple release.

paulchen
Apr 6, 2006, 07:35 AM
Now I'm asking me: Should I install this or Boot camp to chat with my friends in Msn with a cam. (I install my old webcam)
But even my girlfriend who has an windows pc told me: are you fool?? Why would you like to install windows? :)

Electro Funk
Apr 6, 2006, 07:36 AM
Wow... I am beside myself.... Somebody pinch me...

I don't know what to say regarding the last 2 days....

Dual booting supported and today virtualization...:eek:

mark88
Apr 6, 2006, 07:36 AM
Can someone please hurry up and try it out?

hob
Apr 6, 2006, 07:40 AM
Can someone please hurry up and try it out?
Amen to that!!

I want to know if you can run Half-Life 2 with this program, because if you can...

I shall be buying me an intel mac this summer!!

DTphonehome
Apr 6, 2006, 07:40 AM
Wow... I am beside myself.... Somebody pinch me...

I don't know what to say regarding the last 2 days....

Dual booting supported and today virtualization...:eek:

And tomorrow...the world!! MUAHAHAHAHAHA!

paulchen
Apr 6, 2006, 07:42 AM
The Imac is the best computer I've erver bought!!!!! What a chance!! Thank you apple. But don't forget to make publicity for your computers

aussie_geek
Apr 6, 2006, 07:43 AM
WOW!!

way too much for me to process at the moment. i will have to look into this at work tomorrow :p . it seems that it is a great time to be a Mac user. This is obviously a prelude to Leopard. Are there any patents on this concept?? Will Apple have to pay this company to use its technology in their new OS??

uncertain times are ahead...


:confused: :confused: aussie_geek:confused: :confused:

mrzippy
Apr 6, 2006, 07:45 AM
I didn't think the current Core processor (Yonah) supported virtualization, this feature was to be added with Merom.

I would have switched to the Mac sooner if I could have run Windows as a fail safe, so I think this and Boot Camp are great news for Apple and their market share, which is good for all of us - apart from the likely target of hackers if Mac OS X becomes more mainstream.

I only use Windows under Virtual PC to test web sites I am designing, so I have no need or desire to reboot into Windows (if I could)., the only caveat on my Power Mac G5 is that it's painfully slow, if I had an Intel Mac it should be almost native speed, which is very good.

monkeyandy
Apr 6, 2006, 07:45 AM
Sweet....should i purchase a MacBook Pro or wait for the new iBook. This is all super cool. Do u rekon you could use the BootCamp Partition on your hard drive and use that to boot this virtualisation software or do you think you will need to install Windows x2 so it runs in both Boot Camp & this?

This is all good. I cannot wait to get my hands on one of these new Mac laptops....i cannot wait! :D

mattham
Apr 6, 2006, 07:49 AM
From a quick read of the PDF's on the web site this looks like a Kick Ass version of a virtual PC type program. No native support for hardware like video cards etc. (VGA & SVGA with VESA 3 support) is listed as the virtualised video card Virtual network is listed. & no sound by the looks of it.

Prolly good for running those few business app you just cant get on mac. Still only early days - I'm sure it will mature

But for full hardware support - boot camp is the way to go.


BTW - This supports a HEAP more os'es than XP SP2 - major plus!!!

sushi
Apr 6, 2006, 07:52 AM
AMAZING!

Both Soultions are great!! Now, Boot camp offers native enviroment for gaming!!! And the Virtulization offers the ability to run windows within the Mac OS!!!


w000t

Steve Jobs, I never thought I would say it but thank you for opening up this opportunity. Now , I only have to buy 1 computer.... and its a Mac.!!!!
W000t is right. This will provide so much flexibility for the Mac using crowd.

We can run Winders within the Mac OS via this solution or dual boot with Boot Camp.

Wonderful. Simply wonderful!

Photorun
Apr 6, 2006, 07:54 AM
This has been a crazy 24 hours of Mac news, potentially the biggest in either positive (whole new market, and potential marketshare) or negative (developers will drop Apple now that they can do Windoze) we've had in 22 years of Macintosh.

What will they announce next, answered to world peace? Dogs and cats living together in harmony? Stay tuned!

Please tell me that it is impossible to use os x on a windows pc. If not, good night apple. Bwuhuh? Um, it's sorta possible to run OS X on a peecee, but it's a hack and mostly for hardcore techies with time on their hands or those in the fringe, for the masses no, there isn't truly OS X for the peecee nor is it supported.

Now with virtualization Microsoft may announce they too can support running OS X in the XPee or Vista(rk) environment but that hasn't happened yet. And I hope it doesn't because people are cheap and will buy FUGLY Dull computers and other sh***y brands to run OS X under. If only Apple has these options it'll help Apple, if M$ impliments the same thing it could hurt Apple.

iSee
Apr 6, 2006, 08:00 AM
Sheesh, this is all happening so fast! I'd like to see performance of this virtualization scheme...how are graphics, and are all the device drivers included? Can you just use Apple's own driver set (which Boot Camp gives you)?

The graphics performance won't match Boot Camp (and you can't use the BC drivers--those would only work for a machine booted to Windows). So, you'll want to use BC for performance on 3D games. But, if this is anywhere near as good as it looks, you'll be able to use Parallels for other Windows software.

This is great for me--I hardly ever have time anymore for games, so I can stay booted to OS X all the time, and just open up a Windows window when necessary...

gkhaldi
Apr 6, 2006, 08:05 AM
:) :) :)

LosJackal
Apr 6, 2006, 08:05 AM
OMG, I woke up this morning and my wife had already been awake for a couple of hours, downloaded the Parallels beta, and was in the process of installing XP!

I can tell you firsthand, on an high-end Intel iMac (128 MB VRAM, 1.25 GB memory I think), Parallels and Windows XP just SCREAMS!

It is faster than any Windows XP machine I've seen. I know my words won't do it justice, so I made a quick screen capture movie of it reinstalling Firefox, surfing around in IE, and rebooting.

The virtual machine reboots in like 10 seconds more or less, and surfing is almost instant. I'm on the train in to work now (Bluetooth through my RAZR, gotta love the ease of Mac) so I'll upload the video to one of my sites as soon as I get there, shortly after 9am CST.

-Carlos
www.prodedgy.com

dakis
Apr 6, 2006, 08:06 AM
yeah, i want to install xp for gaming purposes...which would run games better you think, boot camp or virtualization? im thinking boot camp...

Thanks

Well, I test-installed Parallels on a Mac Mini Core Solo. The results were extremely disappointing. Installing Windows XP took about 4 hours. The software runs SLOWER than Virtual PC does on my Powerbook.

The problem is probably that Apple disabled Intel's VT technology for the Mac Mini series. That way, Parallels doesn't run in virtual mode. Tonight I'll try the whole thing on my Intel iMac at home. I'm expecting a massive performance increase. But folks, one thing I can promise: no gaming on this software. There's no way this thing performs fast enough. Everything else would have been a big surprise anyway: Playing games on VMWare, for example, has never been possible either.

The gamers either have to use Boot Camp or wait for Cedega. The latter is probably the most attractive solution anyway, as it won't require the user to buy a Windows license.

ebow
Apr 6, 2006, 08:08 AM
Okay, we now have the ability to natively run Windows on Intel Macs. And we can use virtualization software under Mac OS X on Intel Macs. However, BIOS-based x86's have had virtualization software available for a while.

So what I wonder is... could / will someone make a virtualization program for Windows that can run on an Intel-based Mac and let you run Mac OS X in a virtual environment? It would at least be good for gamers who want native performance for Windows-only games, but don't want to have to reboot to use their OS X apps. Who else might use it? I'm not sure. I wonder if vulnerabilities in the host OS (Windows) would leave the virtual environment susceptible, though.

mattham
Apr 6, 2006, 08:10 AM
& it supports macs dual screen technology - hmmmmm - osx on one screen Windoze on da udder ;-D

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 08:12 AM
This is so much more HUGE than Boot Camp. Boot Camp is CRAP compared to Parallels' solution. I am so thrilled at this solution. Where's MacTiger when you need him? :) :eek: :cool: :p :D

hagge
Apr 6, 2006, 08:12 AM
Amen to that!!

I want to know if you can run Half-Life 2 with this program, because if you can...

I shall be buying me an intel mac this summer!!Uhm, doesn't Half-Life 2 already run on Mac? (Maybe just as PPC binary?)

In that case isn't it much better that you buy and use the mac version instead of a wintel version?

I have no idea if CS and so on works on mac to thought.

p0intblank
Apr 6, 2006, 08:13 AM
Wow... first the $13,000 solution, yesterday Apple's, and today this?! I need myself an Intel Mac. :D

Edit: hagge, Half-Life 2 is not available for the Mac, nor is CS.

gkhaldi
Apr 6, 2006, 08:13 AM
Very good stability, very high speed and very very quickly infected (Win XP Pro SP2 that is:( )

mattham
Apr 6, 2006, 08:15 AM
The problem is probably that Apple disabled Intel's VT technology for the Mac Mini series.....

for the whole Mac Mini series or just the Core Solos ?

macintel4me
Apr 6, 2006, 08:15 AM
So what I wonder is... could / will someone make a virtualization program for Windows that can run on an Intel-based Mac and let you run Mac OS X in a virtual environment?
LOL!! Call Apple Legal and ask them this question. 408-974-6638

supremedesigner
Apr 6, 2006, 08:16 AM
This is gonna sound crazy... I have dual monitors (sweet 17" Apple Studio Dispaly) and was wondering if you are eligble to run MAC on monitor 1 and Win on monitor 2 AND simply drag your mouse to another monitor without dual booting or virtualization something? Like draggin' the files / folder from Monitor 1 to Monitor 2? I hope I make sense... but that will be cool though. :rolleyes:

dakis
Apr 6, 2006, 08:16 AM
Wow... first the $13,000 solution, yesterday Apple's, and today this?! I need myself an Intel Mac. :D

Edit: hagge, Half-Life 2 is not available for the Mac, nor is CS.

Well, I was an early adopter (Intel iMac 20"). I was lucky and mine didn't have any of the problems some users reported. After having been utterly disappointed by the small number of software titles available, I'm now actually starting to enjoy having that box around, being able to test all the new stuff.

Chaszmyr
Apr 6, 2006, 08:18 AM
Someone who has installed it hurry up and test a 3D game!

jared_kipe
Apr 6, 2006, 08:18 AM
Wow, good news, my friend went through the trouble of doing the dual boot way. But I guess thats not so important now.

dakis
Apr 6, 2006, 08:19 AM
for the whole Mac Mini series or just the Core Solos ?

All of them, I believe:

"Parallels Workstation 2.1 for Mac OS X offers full support for Intel VT-x (Vanderpool) technology. From our expirience Intel VT-x is enabled by Apple on iMac and MacBook Pro and disabled for some reasons on Mac Mini. So Parallels Workstation is running in Intel VT-x mode on iMac and MacBook Pro and in software virtualization mode on Mac Mini."

Posted by a "Parallels" employee on their support forum (http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?p=237#post237)

supremedesigner
Apr 6, 2006, 08:19 AM
I know CS and CS2 wont run well on Intel Mac but will it run just fine in using Win on mac? I'm curious....but BAH!!! :D

mattham
Apr 6, 2006, 08:20 AM
This is gonna sound crazy... I have dual monitors (sweet 17" Apple Studio Dispaly) and was wondering if you are eligble to run MAC on monitor 1 and Win on monitor 2 AND simply drag your mouse to another monitor without dual booting or virtualization something? Like draggin' the files / folder from Monitor 1 to Monitor 2? I hope I make sense... but that will be cool though. :rolleyes:


You will prolly have to ctrl+alt to release mouse control from win back to osx. You cant drag files from one to the other - there is no virtual shared drives/folders yet - (that I can find) but you can copy paste from one to the other & you should be able to network the two os'es.

gkhaldi
Apr 6, 2006, 08:20 AM
I can get a excellent performance. The processors stack up to 145% of the Core Duo. When running in background full blast (NAV scanning), my front Lotus Notes under OS X is still very responsive.

I can notice that the disk is being held back but this are some numbers:

Max I/O

Reads: 9,7 MBps
Write: 5,6 MBps

Native OS X Reads: 32,3 MBps
Native OS X Writes: 26,7 MBps

Processor utilisation at 100% under windows: 145% under OS X with everything else shut down

Project
Apr 6, 2006, 08:21 AM
This is gonna sound crazy... I have dual monitors (sweet 17" Apple Studio Dispaly) and was wondering if you are eligble to run MAC on monitor 1 and Win on monitor 2 AND simply drag your mouse to another monitor without dual booting or virtualization something? Like draggin' the files / folder from Monitor 1 to Monitor 2? I hope I make sense... but that will be cool though. :rolleyes:

Im pretty sure this would work, just set up your display preferences.

Karrde712
Apr 6, 2006, 08:22 AM
According to the Parallel's website:

Virtual Machine Hardware Specification

Parallels Workstation virtualizes a full set of the standard PC hardware including:

* CPU Pentium II or AMD Duron;
* Generic motherboard compatible with Intel i815 chipset;
* RAM up to 1500 Mb;
* VGA and SVGA with VESA 3.0 support;
* 1.44 Mb floppy drive (mapped to a physical drive or to an image file);
* Up to four IDE devices, that may be either virtual hard drives (from 20 Mb up to 128 Gb each, mapped to image file), or CD/DVD-ROM drives (mapped to physical drive or to image file), or both hard drives and CD/DVD-ROM drives;
* Up to four serial (COM) ports (mapped to real port, to pipe or to output file);
* Up to three bi-directional parallel (LPT) ports (mapped to real port, to printer or to output file);
* Ethernet virtual network card compatible with RTL8029; Generic Parallels Virtual network card;
* AC97 compatible sound card;
* 104-key Windows enhanced keyboard;
* PS/2 wheel mouse.


If you note, this means that the virtual video hardware only supports VESA 3.0 graphics (in other words, there is no 3D virtualization)

3D games will not work. Period.

mattham
Apr 6, 2006, 08:22 AM
All of them, I believe:

"Parallels Workstation 2.1 for Mac OS X offers full support for Intel VT-x (Vanderpool) technology. From our expirience Intel VT-x is enabled by Apple on iMac and MacBook Pro and disabled for some reasons on Mac Mini. So Parallels Workstation is running in Intel VT-x mode on iMac and MacBook Pro and in software virtualization mode on Mac Mini."

Posted by a "Parallels" employee on their support forum (http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?p=237#post237)


:-( :-( :-( :-(

Back to boot camp for me :-(

ImAlwaysRight
Apr 6, 2006, 08:25 AM
Rock on! This is what I want, not Boot Camp.

I'd think gamers might want Boot Camp, business users wanting to run one or two windows apps on their Mac want Virtualization.

mattham
Apr 6, 2006, 08:27 AM
So if Apple do include some form of win xp support in 10.5 (as confirmed by boot camp) & it utilizes vitrualisation (as rumored by just about everyone) it wont be supported on Mini's ???

Can anyone say "firmware update commin up" ?

anthonymoody
Apr 6, 2006, 08:29 AM
This is another great step but IMO the holy grail is still missing. I want to be able to install and run windows apps directly in OSX. It might still look and feel like a windows app, but I wouldn't have to "run" windows or a windows environment. It would run directly in an OSX window.

That said, I'd want that OSX window fully protected from the rest of my 'stuff' :)

TM

iSee
Apr 6, 2006, 08:29 AM
Sweet....should i purchase a MacBook Pro or wait for the new iBook. This is all super cool. Do u rekon you could use the BootCamp Partition on your hard drive and use that to boot this virtualisation software or do you think you will need to install Windows x2 so it runs in both Boot Camp & this?

This is all good. I cannot wait to get my hands on one of these new Mac laptops....i cannot wait! :D

You can have it anyway you want it:
1. Use BC only--you can't get enough of the Windows boot screen--it's a work of art :rolleyes:
2. Use Parallels only--you run Windows business apps when you have, but you like to keep Windows in a window, where it's safe (or, you just can't get enough of old-school Minesweeper :) )
3. Use both BC and Parallels -- 3D games at home at night, and minesweeper and solitare at work during the day.

or...

4. Run just Mac OS X :eek: :eek: :eek: . No Windows! Download "Open-sweeper." Sure the little cells look like jelly beans, but is that really going to slow you down as you clear the field? :D

P.S. I can't wait either--I just ordered my MacBook. I'd been thinking about it for a while, but kept holding off. My heart said "Mac" but my brain said "You make your money off of Windows--you need a Windows laptop, dumb-a**." Well, who's the dumb-a** now, Brain?

AidenShaw
Apr 6, 2006, 08:31 AM
From our expirience Intel VT-x is enabled by Apple on iMac and MacBook Pro and disabled for some reasons on Mac Mini....
Posted by a "Parallels" employee on their support forum (http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?p=237#post237)

Driven by full support for dual-core processors and Intel Virtualization Technology (included in almost every new Intel-powered Mac)

http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac


Kind of a stretch to say "almost every" MacIntel, but then admit that the Mini isn't included.

At least the Parallels engineers seem to be honest, even if the marketing folks have a tendency towards dubious claims. (This isn't the only bit of hype on those pages.)

jared_kipe
Apr 6, 2006, 08:31 AM
Wow, thats weird that it emulates hardware. I would have assumed it would use the native hardware. Maybe in due time.

notjustjay
Apr 6, 2006, 08:35 AM
3. Use both BC and Parallels -- 3D games at home at night, and minesweeper and solitare at work during the day.


But can you use the same install for both? You'd have to have Windows installed twice to use both methods concurrently, wouldn't you?

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 08:37 AM
great, thats more like it. no dual boot. The only question is how viruses will behave under this system. maybe there is a simple and safe solution to this (aside of not using windows!)?Virtualization Is Like Virus Protection. Get infected and you simply replace your setup with the uninfected backup you keep offline all the time. Similarly in Boot Camp when you get infected you just build a new "Partition". :D

(L)
Apr 6, 2006, 08:40 AM
Definitely much better a solution than Boot Camp.

I don't know about that. Sure, for the user under most circumstances, say, using one Windows app, it would be a bother to reboot. But, doesn't this mean there isn't as much separation between the two, like partitions and worse, what can infiltrate your computer via holes in Windows? I'm not sure about viruses getting in and moving to OS X (seems like getting in is just one part of the difficulty of breaching OS X), but somehow I can't see Windows being hit by its own errors and foreign maladies and not having some sort of effect on OS X.

One more thing...dual boot is plenty to persuade people afraid to let go of Windows to switch. Having Windows within OS X is better in the sense that you are primarily running OS X, and Windows can count sort of like another app, meaning that it by nature would be one of many, compared to OS X, which cannot be missed. But, then it becomes a different picture for many people. People that are rather disillusioned with Windows but afraid to let go in favor of Macs could easily favor a 2-in-1 solution like Apple proposes, and then choose what works for them, and abandon the other. Win within OS X is better for those that are somewhat convinced they need a couple of apps that are Windows only. In other words, for many people persuaded by Boot Camp to switch, the reality will be that they'll quickly find what they need on the Mac and not boot back. Others will want to boot every so often into Windows. Very few will boot every day, back and forth...unless it's at the office vs at home - but even then, if OS X can do it (Office, iWork, to Mail, iCal), don't expect them to boot back and forth for long.

Then there are those that aren't simply trying out if they will be OK on a Mac - those that know the Mac lacks some Windows software they need. These people will have to buy third party Win within OS X software to be satisfied. But I would be willing to bet Apple will never sell such software - it'd be better to start working on or attracting developers for new apps to beat the apps you need in Windows.

macpastor
Apr 6, 2006, 08:42 AM
I didn't spot it hear, but you still have to bring your own copy of XP to use, right?

(L)
Apr 6, 2006, 08:43 AM
P.S. I can't wait either--I just ordered my MacBook. I'd been thinking about it for a while, but kept holding off. My heart said "Mac" but my brain said "You make your money off of Windows--you need a Windows laptop, dumb-a**." Well, who's the dumb-a** now, Brain?

Your a** is. duh. :D

Hopefully soon you can make money off of Mac.:eek:

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 08:46 AM
I didn't see this posted yet so here is the Parallels' Press Release (http://www.parallels.com/en/news/id,8655) which has a lot more detail in one place about how this works. There is also a feedback button on the free trial download page (http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/) where you can ask them direct quesitons.

You can also email them at macbeta@parallels.com

Please can we have some of you step up to the plate and get this thing installed and report back ASAP?? I can't wait for all the cheers to begin!! :D :p :) :cool:

(L)
Apr 6, 2006, 08:47 AM
Very good stability, very high speed and very very quickly infected (Win XP Pro SP2 that is:( )

Nice that it works (at least, save for the infections). I've got to say though, those blue bars are overbearing and rather plasticky. And the fonts...uggggh. But, hey, it's better than not being possible.

gkhaldi
Apr 6, 2006, 08:48 AM
I didn't spot it hear, but you still have to bring your own copy of XP to use, right?

Yes, you need to bring yr copy of Windows

supremedesigner
Apr 6, 2006, 08:50 AM
I know CS and CS2 wont run well on Intel Mac but will it run just fine in using Win on mac? I'm curious....but BAH!!! :D

Neevvveerrr miiinnnd! :p

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?home&NewsID=14299

Impressed I am for now until CS3 comes out for Intel Mac :D

Sharkus
Apr 6, 2006, 08:51 AM
I have to say I'm impressed so far. Downloaded the beta and within 25 mins I have XP SP2 up and running, and rather quickly at that. I've not had a good play with it but it seems stable, quick, and networking seems to be there, I could certainly "see" the host machine that has Windows Sharing running. Very impressive so far.

I am now installing 98SE to see how that hold up. So far the install is a lot slower than XP, and I expected it to be quicker, but hey, if it installs and networking is as it should be, then great.

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 08:51 AM
I didn't spot it hear, but you still have to bring your own copy of XP to use, right?Or any other version of Windoze.

mac jones
Apr 6, 2006, 08:54 AM
I didn't see this posted yet so here is the Parallels' Press Release (http://www.parallels.com/en/news/id,8655) which has a lot more detail in one place about how this works. There is also a feedback button on the free trial download page (http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/) where you can ask them direct quesitons.

You can also email them at macbeta@parallels.com

Please can we have some of you step up to the plate and get this thing installed and report back ASAP?? I can't wait for all the cheers to begin!! :D :p :) :cool:

my you are optimistic, maybe afew user reviews before the cheers.

LagunaSol
Apr 6, 2006, 08:56 AM
So can Parallels use the same Windows partition/install used in Boot Camp? So you don't have to have dual copies of Windows installed on your Mac?

vjl323
Apr 6, 2006, 09:00 AM
Now I'm asking me: Should I install this or Boot camp to chat with my friends in Msn with a cam. (I install my old webcam)
But even my girlfriend who has an windows pc told me: are you fool?? Why would you like to install windows? :)

Just use aMSN - it supports cam and MSN just fine. Works with built in iSight on the iMac, plus firewire and USB cams too. And it is free! Plus it works great!

http://amsn.sf.net/

/vjl/

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 09:00 AM
Now I'm asking me: Should I install this or Boot camp to chat with my friends in Msn with a cam. (I install my old webcam)
But even my girlfriend who has an windows pc told me: are you fool?? Why would you like to install windows? :)PAUL buddy,

This is a no brainer. Boot Camp is a dangerous and bad solution. Parallels' Workstation 2.1 for Mac OS X is a SAFE and Superior solution. Put it this way - Would you like to be able to ONLY look at Windoze ALL-THE-TIME when you're using it?

OR: Would you only like to look at Windoze for the time you MUST USE IT (or game with it) and instantly switch back to your OS X interface and applications when you don't while still having the Windoze at the ready when you need it?

Plus you are majorly susceptible to virus attacks with the Boot Camp "non-solution" while Parallels' solution is virtually virus immune - IE you can kill an infected version of your Workstation and instantly replace it with one that isn't infected. :p

Sweet....should i purchase a MacBook Pro or wait for the new iBook. This is all super cool. Do u rekon you could use the BootCamp Partition on your hard drive and use that to boot this virtualisation software or do you think you will need to install Windows x2 so it runs in both Boot Camp & this?

This is all good. I cannot wait to get my hands on one of these new Mac laptops....i cannot wait! :DForget Boot Camp. It's dangerous and irrelevant now. Are you daft? :) :eek: :D :p

mac jones
Apr 6, 2006, 09:03 AM
PAUL buddy,

This is a no brainer. Boot Camp is a dangerous and bad solution. Parallels' Workstation 2.1 for Mac OS X is a SAFE and Superior solution. Put it this way - Would you like to be able to ONLY look at Windoze ALL-THE-TIME when you're using it?

OR: Would you only like to look at Windoze for the time you MUST USE IT (or game with it) and instantly switch back to your OS X interface and applications when you don't while still having the Windoze at the ready when you need it?

Plus you are majorly susceptible to virus attacks with the Boot Camp "non-solution" while Parallels' solution is virtually virus immune - IE you can kill an infected version of your Workstation and instantly replace it with one that isn't infected. :p

again dude, why don't you wait until you have tried it?

AidenShaw
Apr 6, 2006, 09:03 AM
Wow, thats weird that it emulates hardware. I would have assumed it would use the native hardware. Maybe in due time.
It uses the native instructions for normal computing and arithmetic - if you're just playing with numbers (for example, encoding a WMA file) you'll get near native speed.

When the guest machine tries to execute kernel code that changes the state of the emulated hardware - that must be prevented to keep the VM from modifying the host.

Instead, the VMM (the Virtual Machine Monitor - the OSX program that's controlling the emulated virtual machine) has to see what the instruction is trying to do, and to modify the state of the emulated hardware so that it appears to the VM that its kernel instructions did the right thing.

VT makes it much faster to find and emulate these privileged instructions.

On VMware, Virtual server/PC - after installing the OS you then install a special package of drivers (VMware Tools or Virtual Machine Additions). These drivers bypass some of the full hardware emulation and talk to the VMM directly - for example a network call can be passed through to the host network driver without doing full emulation of a network card.

VMware/VPC are much slower without those special drivers.

JoshH
Apr 6, 2006, 09:03 AM
Well, who's the dumb-a** now, Brain?

Haha :)

I'm off to try it this weekend. Good times, good times.

calculus
Apr 6, 2006, 09:04 AM
...and again yawn.

SaddY
Apr 6, 2006, 09:05 AM
Now I'm asking me: Should I install this or Boot camp to chat with my friends in Msn with a cam. (I install my old webcam)
But even my girlfriend who has an windows pc told me: are you fool?? Why would you like to install windows? :)

Whatabout installing aMSN ?

Macnoviz
Apr 6, 2006, 09:05 AM
This is another great step but IMO the holy grail is still missing. I want to be able to install and run windows apps directly in OSX. It might still look and feel like a windows app, but I wouldn't have to "run" windows or a windows environment. It would run directly in an OSX window.

That said, I'd want that OSX window fully protected from the rest of my 'stuff' :)

TM

You're absolutely right: I was thinking the exact same thing, we need something like Rosetta for windows apps, that way you have windows applications running at native speeds, and because there is no windows, there are no security breaches in your OS, and no viruses.
This may seem improbable, or even impossible, but that would be the "nec plus ultra" for Mac users

mac jones
Apr 6, 2006, 09:06 AM
It uses the native instructions for normal computing and arithmetic - if you're just playing with numbers (for example, encoding a WMA file) you'll get near native speed.

When the guest machine tries to execute kernel code that changes the state of the emulated hardware - that must be prevented too keep the VM from modifying the host.

Instead, the VMM (the Virtual Machine Monitor - the OSX program that's controlling the emulated virtual machine) has to see what the instruction is trying to do, and to modify the state of the emulated hardware so that it appears to the VM that its kernel instructions did the right thing.

VT makes it much faster to find and emulate these privileged instructions.

On VMware, Virtual server/PC - after installing the OS you then install a special package of drivers (VMware Tools or Virtual Machine Additions). These drivers bypass some of the full hardware emulation and talk to the VMM directly - for example a network call can be passed through to the host network driver without doing full emulation of a network card.

VMware/VPC are much slower without those special drivers.

Listen, why don't you ALL wait until the word comes in on exactly what this is like. Your all just guessing and reading off the product page which, believe it or not, just might not be the %100 truth

just wait for a short while

vamp07
Apr 6, 2006, 09:07 AM
I just installed it on a 1.83 MacBook Pro. So far speed wise I am VERY impressed. Boots faster the any XP machine I have ever seen (makes no sense but its great). I would say speed wise apps feel like they are running native. This is not for running games but if you just want to run some windows apps it is amazingly fast and stable. Big congrats to Parallels for pulling this off.

dogcowx
Apr 6, 2006, 09:09 AM
I'm running it on my MacBook Pro.

Pros - LIGHTNING FAST!

Cons - Definitely still a beta. It didn't like my DVD drive, so I had to put in the raw device name ("/dev/rdisk1") in the program. Also caused my MBP to reboot during the Windows install (yes, the entire machine).

I'm trying Win XP Home, but if it crashes in the install again, I'm going to opt for XP Professional.

I'll post more details when I get them.

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 09:10 AM
OMG, I woke up this morning and my wife had already been awake for a couple of hours, downloaded the Parallels beta, and was in the process of installing XP!

I can tell you firsthand, on an high-end Intel iMac (128 MB VRAM, 1.25 GB memory I think), Parallels and Windows XP just SCREAMS!

It is faster than any Windows XP machine I've seen. I know my words won't do it justice, so I made a quick screen capture movie of it reinstalling Firefox, surfing around in IE, and rebooting.

The virtual machine reboots in like 10 seconds more or less, and surfing is almost instant. I'm on the train in to work now (Bluetooth through my RAZR, gotta love the ease of Mac) so I'll upload the video to one of my sites as soon as I get there, shortly after 9am CST.

-Carlos
www.prodedgy.comExcellent report. Thank you for the video Carlos. Can't wait to see it. :)

sishaw
Apr 6, 2006, 09:10 AM
I can't opine yet on which (dual boot or virtualization) is the better solution for me, but it is definitely the case that for those of us worried about replacing an older PC desktop (and the cost of buying Mac versions of all the software we've accumulated over the years--yikes!), going Mac is now a no-brainer. I like my iBook very much, and expect to go all-Mac when I eventually replace my PC desktop, and just use the Windows operating system to the extent I continue to use my legacy software.

One observation from my limited experience dual-booting XP and Ubuntu Linux: dual booting is fun at first, but I've found that it gets old fast. I find that after 3 months or so I now tend to leave the computer on one operating system or the other for long periods of time, rather than do task-based rebooting.

mac jones
Apr 6, 2006, 09:11 AM
I just installed it on a 1.83 MacBook Pro. So far speed wise I am VERY impressed. Boots faster the any XP machine I have ever seen (makes no sense but its great). I would say speed wise apps feel like they are running native. This is not for running games but if you just want to run some windows apps it is amazingly fast and stable. Big congrats to Parallels for pulling this off.

well, frankly I don't believe it (I can't as it goes against everything i've ever seen)

I have a very hard time after having used a polished product like VPC which was like looking at a snail crawl

But I hope to stand corrected.

vamp07
Apr 6, 2006, 09:14 AM
One observation from my limited experience dual-booting XP and Ubuntu Linux: dual booting is fun at first, but I've found that it gets old fast. I find that after 3 months or so I now tend to leave the computer on one operating system or the other for long periods of time, rather than do task-based rebooting.


I completely agree. I installed Boot Camp but what I really wanted was what Parallels appears to have pulled off.

arn
Apr 6, 2006, 09:15 AM
well, frankly I don't believe it (I can't as it goes against everything i've ever seen)
I have a very hard time after having used a polished product like VPC which was like looking at a snail crawl
But I hope to stand corrected.

The big difference is that VPC was entirely emulated. Every instruction was translanted on the fly from Intel to PPC.

This solution eliminates the on-the-fly translation, since the new Macs use the Intel processor.

arn

maclamb
Apr 6, 2006, 09:15 AM
just installed and testing - very easy very quick (although the mouse capture is a bit odd until the Tools are installed)

I have an iMac 20/2.0 2GB
OK, It's VERY fast - I would say, yes, close to native spped - equal to VMWare on a P4 1.8
Haven't installed office or other pgms yet - actually have to go to work.
But, so far, very pleased.

:p

Baron58
Apr 6, 2006, 09:19 AM
Forget Boot Camp. It's dangerous and irrelevant now. Are you daft? :) :eek: :D :p


Will you knock off the FUD? It's getting tiresome. Boot Camp is a perfect solution for a lot of needs, 'XP-in-a-window' is a solution for other needs. You're spouting a lot of nonsense that you don't understand.

animefx
Apr 6, 2006, 09:20 AM
This is certainly great news! We need to let the masses know about it. Please digg this story to help promote this news:

http://www.digg.com/apple/Parallels_Workstation_-_Use_Win_XP_Linux_INSIDE_Mac_OS_X_-_NOT_BootCamp

Baron58
Apr 6, 2006, 09:24 AM
Boot Camp is a dangerous and bad solution. Parallels' Workstation 2.1 for Mac OS X is a SAFE and Superior solution.


BootCamp is NOT DANGEROUS. Virtualisation is NOT SAFE AND SUPERIOR. I know what you're saying about being able to replace the image file with a 'clean' one, but similar solutions will/do exist for the native partition method that BootCamp uses as well. There are lots of reasons why running a dedicated session on bare metal is desireable. Quit spreading bad information.

JGowan
Apr 6, 2006, 09:24 AM
Wow... I am beside myself.... Somebody pinch me...Why don't you ask the guy NEXT TO YOU? :D

asphalt-proof
Apr 6, 2006, 09:25 AM
Will you knock off the FUD? It's getting tiresome. Boot Camp is a perfect solution for a lot of needs, 'XP-in-a-window' is a solution for other needs. You're spouting a lot of nonsense that you don't understand.


I agree. You make it sound as if installing Boot Camp will automatically crash your computer, destroy your data, kidnap your children and drive away with your lawn tractor. Give it a rest. Apple wouldn't release the Beta if it thought that it would trash their computers. If Windows is really that dangerous why is 95% of the world using its products? XP is safe, stable and reliable. Yes its prone to viruses but a lot of it is due to stupid users who download crap from the internet or don't use virus protection wisely.

kainjow
Apr 6, 2006, 09:26 AM
well, frankly I don't believe it (I can't as it goes against everything i've ever seen)

I have a very hard time after having used a polished product like VPC which was like looking at a snail crawl

But I hope to stand corrected.
This kind of stuff has existed for a while with Virtual PC and VMware on x86 boxes. The main difference here is it's using special new technology in Intel's new processors.

Watch this video if you don't believe it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC_DuAUTHWI

SteveG4Cube
Apr 6, 2006, 09:27 AM
I have to use Quickbooks Enterprise Solutions at work, which is PC only. Because of this, I have a crappy old PC laptop in addition to my eMac. I tried to convince our network guy to let me run it on my Mac with VPC, but he was reluctant because he's afraid there could be data corruption. Now, I can use BootCamp and he can't make any arguement. My question is, what are the risks of any kind of data loss while using the virtualization option? Dual booting would be a pain just to access this one app. but if it's truly safer, I guess that's what I've got to do.

LosJackal
Apr 6, 2006, 09:29 AM
Excellent report. Thank you for the video Carlos. Can't wait to see it. :)

Here it is:

http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51

whooleytoo
Apr 6, 2006, 09:29 AM
The Parallels site seems down now - too much traffic?

supremedesigner
Apr 6, 2006, 09:32 AM
Will you knock off the FUD? It's getting tiresome. Boot Camp is a perfect solution for a lot of needs, 'XP-in-a-window' is a solution for other needs. You're spouting a lot of nonsense that you don't understand.

I second that! It's gonna have awesome built-in "boot camp" when Leopard come. No more searching the best crappy programs that will enable you to run XP on it! No offense but that's my opinion. Apple is tryin' to make it simple as possible. :D

dakis
Apr 6, 2006, 09:34 AM
The Parallels site seems down now - too much traffic?

seems that way. Darn, I just got home from work and wanted to try Parallels on my Intel iMac, after having been utterly disappointed on the Mac Mini...

sushi
Apr 6, 2006, 09:35 AM
You're absolutely right: I was thinking the exact same thing, we need something like Rosetta for windows apps, that way you have windows applications running at native speeds, and because there is no windows, there are no security breaches in your OS, and no viruses.
This may seem improbable, or even impossible, but that would be the "nec plus ultra" for Mac users
Uh, virus, trojans and worms run under the Windows environment and therefore could easily run under a Rosetta type environment that supports Windows apps.

What they could affect will depend on how they are programmed.

kainjow
Apr 6, 2006, 09:35 AM
I have to use Quickbooks Enterprise Solutions at work, which is PC only. Because of this, I have a crappy old PC laptop in addition to my eMac. I tried to convince our network guy to let me run it on my Mac with VPC, but he was reluctant because he's afraid there could be data corruption. Now, I can use BootCamp and he can't make any arguement. My question is, what are the risks of any kind of data loss while using the virtualization option? Dual booting would be a pain just to access this one app. but if it's truly safer, I guess that's what I've got to do.
Same risks with anything else you do on your computer. With virtualization, the entire virtual hard disk is represented as 1 file, or a group of files on your Mac. That file, just like any other file on your Mac (or PC), can go corrupt for any reason. If you backup regularly, you'll be fine.

gkhaldi
Apr 6, 2006, 09:35 AM
Here it is:

http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51

Cool vid. How did you capture this under OS X? Any specific tools you used?

GFLPraxis
Apr 6, 2006, 09:38 AM
This is so much more HUGE than Boot Camp. Boot Camp is CRAP compared to Parallels' solution. I am so thrilled at this solution. Where's MacTiger when you need him? :) :eek: :cool: :p :D

Don't be silly. Virtual machines can't fully utilize the graphics card because OS X is already using it. You can't play games on Parallel's solution, one of the top three reasons for using Windows (the other two being workplaces that require it and special software only available on Windows).

mark88
Apr 6, 2006, 09:40 AM
Don't be silly. Virtual machines can't fully utilize the graphics card because OS X is already using it. You can't play games on Parallel's solution, one of the top three reasons for using Windows (the other two being workplaces that require it and special software only available on Windows).

exactly, each solution has it's own advantages and disadvantages. I'm not a gamer and therefore prefer the conveinience of having windows inside OS X.

displaced
Apr 6, 2006, 09:40 AM
Any .NET developers out there with an MBP and Parallels?

I build Compact Framework apps in VS2005. From the descriptions of Parallels, and my previous experience with 'native' VM software (VMWare on PC), I'd imagine that Visual Studio itself will run absolutely fine.

But can anyone out there try to connect a PocketPC device (via USB cradle) and see if ActiveSync/Visual Studio detect and deploy to it correctly?

If so, then 'goodbye' to every single PC I own, and work can take their Dell back :)

sushi
Apr 6, 2006, 09:42 AM
I agree. You make it sound as if installing Boot Camp will automatically crash your computer, destroy your data, kidnap your children and drive away with your lawn tractor.
Even my lawn tractor?! :eek: :D

On a serious note, I can't believe how naive some of the posters are when it comes to Winders.

Anyhow with these two solutions, it gives the user much more flexibility with one computer. w000t! :D

LosJackal
Apr 6, 2006, 09:42 AM
Cool vid. How did you capture this under OS X? Any specific tools you used?

http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51

I used ScreenSnapz Pro (http://www.ambrosiasw.com/utilities/snapzprox/)from AmbosiaSW. I had trouble the first two times because it seems to be failing on the H.264 encode. The third time I just used Apple Animation codec, it worked out fine...so forgive me if my demonstration started to get sloppy!

-Carlos
www.prodedgy.com

mark88
Apr 6, 2006, 09:42 AM
Here it is:

http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51

That looks pretty impressive to me

SteveG4Cube
Apr 6, 2006, 09:42 AM
Same risks with anything else you do on your computer. With virtualization, the entire virtual hard disk is represented as 1 file, or a group of files on your Mac. That file, just like any other file on your Mac (or PC), can go corrupt for any reason. If you backup regularly, you'll be fine.


The data is stored on the server, and when a user logs on, it pulls loads to the local computer and then updates the server when any changes are made. He's afraid that a corruption on my system could wipe out the data on the main server. Obviously, he backs it up, but we could lose anything since the last update. If there are real risks, I'll just use dual booting, but if the risks are the same, I'd like to use Windows within OSX.

GFLPraxis
Apr 6, 2006, 09:43 AM
Uh, virus, trojans and worms run under the Windows environment and therefore could easily run under a Rosetta type environment that supports Windows apps.

What they could affect will depend on how they are programmed.

In a Sandbox environment like Parallels, it could only affect Windows, and not the Mac.

In a dual boot setup, it can't read the Mac partition so the virus should be unable to even see any of your Mac's files. So it could only affect the Windows partition.

calculus
Apr 6, 2006, 09:43 AM
Is it not time to rename this site 'Windowsrumors'? Nobody seems to want to talk about anything else!

GFLPraxis
Apr 6, 2006, 09:44 AM
exactly, each solution has it's own advantages and disadvantages. I'm not a gamer and therefore prefer the conveinience of having windows inside OS X.

See, in that case, this is a better solution for you.
I simply object to the poster referring to the other solution (which is faster and can play 3D games) as "crap".

RollTide
Apr 6, 2006, 09:45 AM
Since windows will be running inide OSX will tour comp still be vulnerable to the same things as windows machines????

whooleytoo
Apr 6, 2006, 09:46 AM
In a dual boot setup, it can't read the Mac partition so the virus should be unable to even see any of your Mac's files. So it could only affect the Windows partition.

But surely if a Windows app can repartition the hard drive, a Windows virus/trojan could do likewise? Thus potentially wiping whatever was on the Mac partition?

GFLPraxis
Apr 6, 2006, 09:47 AM
PAUL buddy,

This is a no brainer. Boot Camp is a dangerous and bad solution. Parallels' Workstation 2.1 for Mac OS X is a SAFE and Superior solution. Put it this way - Would you like to be able to ONLY look at Windoze ALL-THE-TIME when you're using it?

OR: Would you only like to look at Windoze for the time you MUST USE IT (or game with it) and instantly switch back to your OS X interface and applications when you don't while still having the Windoze at the ready when you need it?

Plus you are majorly susceptible to virus attacks with the Boot Camp "non-solution" while Parallels' solution is virtually virus immune - IE you can kill an infected version of your Workstation and instantly replace it with one that isn't infected. :p

You have no idea what you are talking about. Boot Camp has Windows residing it it's own partition seperate from everything else- it won't even be able to read the Mac partition. Parallel's solution and Boot Camp are equally likely to be infected; with Parallel's solution, you trash the file and start over, with Boot Camp's solution, you trash the partition and start over.

LosJackal
Apr 6, 2006, 09:47 AM
http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51

That looks pretty impressive to me

It's resized down 50% in ScreenSnapz Pro, but it was running in 1024x768. I tried to keep the cursor moving to prove I wasn't doing any "creative editing" to make it look any better than it already does on its own! Gives you a nice sense of time too.

-Carlos
www.prodedgy.com

phgreer
Apr 6, 2006, 09:50 AM
This news was the tipping point for us. We have been needing to get a new computer for a while now to help us increase our workflow and provide better service to our clients but my wife who co-owns our business with me has been a little hesitant to get the a new Machine until we could use Windows in some form either through dual booting or virtualization on the intel machines. So I just bought an Intel iMac via the Apple Store's special deal refurbished section with Apple Care. We are currently running a Dell 8200 with XP SP2 and and older iBook with Tiger. I've been looking forward to this day for a long time. Money has been a bit tight but the potential of this machine will help us get to the next level.

GFLPraxis
Apr 6, 2006, 09:50 AM
But surely if a Windows app can repartition the hard drive, a Windows virus/trojan could do likewise? Thus potentially wiping whatever was on the Mac partition?

I've been hit by hundreds of viruses over the years (both as a kid and now because of computer illiterate family). Not one has ever affected my Linux partition (invisible to Windows) or formatted the hard drive. Nor have I ever met anyone who has had a virus format their hard drive (though a number of people who formatted their drive to get rid of a virus that completely destroyed Windows and made it unusable).

Also, most of the hard-drive-destroying viruses simply destroy the File Allocation Table (FAT) that the FAT32 format uses. That would, again, only affect the Windows partition ;)

I guess it might be theoretically possible, but so unlikely that I personally wouldn't pay attention to it. Maybe if a virus was specificly designed to attack Mac users running Windows...but the percentage of Mac users running Windows is even lower than the amount of Mac OS X users (well duh) so you'd think a virus writer would just write it for OS X.

sushi
Apr 6, 2006, 09:51 AM
In a Sandbox environment like Parallels, it could only affect Windows, and not the Mac.
Not necessarily.

Just like a program running in VPC can go outside of the sandbox.

What I am talking about here, is sharing of HDs/Folders. So technically it is possible for a Windows application to get at items outside of the PC sandbox.

Granted this is a low probability, but technically it can be done. So there is some risk when you are sharing a HD/Folder.

Thataboy
Apr 6, 2006, 09:52 AM
Would someone please test out whether you can run DRMed WMP10 files in a Windows XP guest OS? I assume you can, but a friend asked me to confirm. Because he wants to see. Um.. dirty stuff on demand :)

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 09:57 AM
Not necessarily.

Just like a program running in VPC can go outside of the sandbox.

What I am talking about here, is sharing of HDs/Folders. So technically it is possible for a Windows application to get at items outside of the PC sandbox.

Granted this is a low probability, but technically it can be done. So there is some risk when you are sharing a HD/Folder.

Yes, but even then it would have to be a file deletion risk. It's not like some piece of Windows malware is going to "infect" the Mac environment.

And if you don't share filesystems, there is zero risk.

People, folks have been doing virtualization for YEARS on x86.

To rehash something I said in a previous thread:

A Windows environment running in VM is the same as any other Windows environment, and can be subject to the same vulnerabilities.

However, it's much less likely to be problematic for the following reasons:

- The entire environment is "sandboxed", network-wise, within the host OS's networking. Most Windows XP installations will now be behind the integrated software firewall anyway, but this is just another layer of protection: it's essentially like being behind a NAT router.

- A virtual machine environment, being secondary to the primary environment, is typically only used for targeted tasks, not routinely used for things like web browsing, email, and downloading - the major vectors of infection for much spyware/malware

- Since the virtual machine's disk is just a file on the host OS's drive, it can be immediately trashed and restored from a known-good pristine backup in seconds

- If no filesystem sharing is done via the VM between the Windows environment and the host (Mac OS X) environment, there is no[1] way that even severe malware within the Windows environment can cause any damage to the Mac OS X environment

- If filesystems are shared, e.g., a folder on the Mac side is shared as a drive letter on the Windows side, any malware that alters filesystems could theoretically alter the shared filesystem. If a virus, for example, attempted to delete all files on drives other than C:, that would be affected. But, 1.) Most malware doesn't just arbitrarily delete files, because its goal is to spread itself, and 2.) ONLY files that are shared could even theoretically be affected. Also, Windows malware will typically target Windows OS features and filesystem elements. But if you really are paranoid and want to be safe, you probably wouldn't want to, say, share your entire Mac OS X volume as a drive letter into the PC environment.

The bottom line is that from a technical and practical usage standpoint, running Windows in a VM is probably the safest possible way to run Windows, and there aren't really any ways, except for very specific ways via the explicit filesystem sharing, that anything that happens in the Windows environment can even touch your Mac OS X installation. And even if something went horribly wrong in your Windows environment, you can just trash the file that represents it on the Mac side of things, and replace it with your most recent and/or pristine backup of that file.

You guys, and many, many others, are going to *love* virtualization on Mac OS X on Intel-based Macs: running other x86 OSes - Linux, Windows, FreeBSD, etc., at near-native speed of the hardware - right along side Mac OS X, instantly able to switch back and forth.

[1] Sure, you could argue that someone could make Windows malware that specifically also targets an unknown vulnerability in a particular piece of virtual machine software, thereby somehow gaining access to the host side. But that is *extremely* unlikely to the point that it's not even worth mentioning.

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu

bretm
Apr 6, 2006, 09:59 AM
PAUL buddy,

This is a no brainer. Boot Camp is a dangerous and bad solution. Parallels' Workstation 2.1 for Mac OS X is a SAFE and Superior solution. Put it this way - Would you like to be able to ONLY look at Windoze ALL-THE-TIME when you're using it?

OR: Would you only like to look at Windoze for the time you MUST USE IT (or game with it) and instantly switch back to your OS X interface and applications when you don't while still having the Windoze at the ready when you need it?

Plus you are majorly susceptible to virus attacks with the Boot Camp "non-solution" while Parallels' solution is virtually virus immune - IE you can kill an infected version of your Workstation and instantly replace it with one that isn't infected. :p

Yeah, game are great without the graphics acceleration or AUDIO!

Either way, a windows virus is useless on your Mac Partition and you can reinstall windows, parallels, whatever.

jared_kipe
Apr 6, 2006, 09:59 AM
It uses the native instructions for normal computing and arithmetic - if you're just playing with numbers (for example, encoding a WMA file) you'll get near native speed.

When the guest machine tries to execute kernel code that changes the state of the emulated hardware - that must be prevented to keep the VM from modifying the host.

Instead, the VMM (the Virtual Machine Monitor - the OSX program that's controlling the emulated virtual machine) has to see what the instruction is trying to do, and to modify the state of the emulated hardware so that it appears to the VM that its kernel instructions did the right thing.

VT makes it much faster to find and emulate these privileged instructions.

On VMware, Virtual server/PC - after installing the OS you then install a special package of drivers (VMware Tools or Virtual Machine Additions). These drivers bypass some of the full hardware emulation and talk to the VMM directly - for example a network call can be passed through to the host network driver without doing full emulation of a network card.

VMware/VPC are much slower without those special drivers.

I understand this, its just a problem for games mainly. But we can dual boot I guess, so this is for apps. And dual booting is for games.

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 10:00 AM
POST #50 All of them, I believe:

"Parallels Workstation 2.1 for Mac OS X offers full support for Intel VT-x (Vanderpool) technology. From our expirience Intel VT-x is enabled by Apple on iMac and MacBook Pro and disabled for some reasons on Mac Mini. So Parallels Workstation is running in Intel VT-x mode on iMac and MacBook Pro and in software virtualization mode on Mac Mini."

Posted by a "Parallels" employee on their support forum (http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?p=237#post237)Now that's what I would have to call INSANE.:eek: :eek: :confused: :confused:

WHY? The mini is the one a lot of Windoze users would naturally gravitate to because it's less expensive. Duh! :( :mad: :eek: :confused:

BUT From Post #150:
To those who are curious:

Parallels is DEFINITELY using VT.

And on the Mac mini, when they say it's using "software virtualization", they don't mean it's slow as molasses like Virtual PC on PowerPC. It's still incredibly fast. Just try it. Software virtualization is what all commercial desktop virtualization products (like VMware) have been doing up until now, anyway: they're still passing x86 calls more or less directly to the processor. VT allows this to be done even more directly and efficiently, and Parallels is the first desktop virtualization product to even use VT. So, Intel Mac mini owners, do yourself a favor and try this. You won't be disappointed.

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.eduThanks Dave.

Malcster
Apr 6, 2006, 10:00 AM
Yummy, far preferable to Boot Camp, i can stay in OS X! now managed to download it but can't get a trial key!

15 minutes of XP yesterday from Boot Camp was more than enough to reinforce my love of Mac OS X ;)

Stridder44
Apr 6, 2006, 10:02 AM
I think I just shiated myself...

JGowan
Apr 6, 2006, 10:02 AM
While this costs $49 and Apple's solution is Free, I can see how this might make Apple have to really bring out the big guns for Leopard. This will do ANY VERSION of Windows AND Linux. Amazing. I believe that Apple will do one better with Leopard... It'll run all PC software/Linux software and ... wait for it... MAC software! And all run WITHOUT the glitches. Sound works, Keyboards, video cams, etc... all work!

Have an old Mac game that you haven't played because Classic was damned to the information highway to hell? No problem with Leopard.

Nintendo's newest system (Revolution) will be able to play all Nintendo console games ever... why not Apple?

dausone
Apr 6, 2006, 10:02 AM
Here it is:

http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51


Maybe its just me... but I would NEVER be surfing the web running WinXP on my iMac no matter how cool it could be.

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 10:02 AM
To those who are curious:

Parallels is DEFINITELY using VT.

And on the Mac mini, when they say it's using "software virtualization", they don't mean it's slow as molasses like Virtual PC on PowerPC. It's still incredibly fast. Just try it. Software virtualization is what all commercial desktop virtualization products (like VMware) have been doing up until now, anyway: they're still passing x86 calls more or less directly to the processor. VT allows this to be done even more directly and efficiently, and Parallels is the first desktop virtualization product to even use VT. So, Intel Mac mini owners, do yourself a favor and try this. You won't be disappointed.

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu

skochan
Apr 6, 2006, 10:03 AM
I can't seem to get the Parallels sw to install Windows XP Pro (using the same installation disk I used yesterday with Boot Camp). I tried /dev/rdisk1s0 and other possibilities to specify the DVD drive with no luck. I keep getting a "No boot device available" message in the console window.

Any advice would be appreciated. By the way, I'm trying to install on a MacBook Pro.

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 10:04 AM
Yeah, game are great without the graphics acceleration or AUDIO!

Either way, a windows virus is useless on your Mac Partition and you can reinstall windows, parallels, whatever.But won't drivers for those be right around the corner? :confused:

dernhelm
Apr 6, 2006, 10:04 AM
Wow... I am beside myself.... Somebody pinch me...

I don't know what to say regarding the last 2 days....

Dual booting supported and today virtualization...:eek:

Agreed.

Best. Birthday. Present. Ever.

:cool:

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 10:05 AM
I can't seem to get the Parallels sw to install Windows XP Pro (using the same installation disk I used yesterday with Boot Camp). I tried /dev/rdisk1s0 and other possibilities to specify the DVD drive with no luck. I keep getting a "No boot device available" message in the console window.

Any advice would be appreciated. By the way, I'm trying to install on a MacBook Pro.

Just make an ISO image of the XP installation disc using something like Disk Utility or Toast and point it at that. That's all you need to do. I and many others have already installed Windows XP and other OSes this way in Parallels.

The fact that the "Use real CD/DVD ROM" is grayed out might also be a small clue that using a real CD is unsupported by Parallels in the current beta. ;-)

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 10:06 AM
I can't seem to get the Parallels sw to install Windows XP Pro (using the same installation disk I used yesterday with Boot Camp). I tried /dev/rdisk1s0 and other possibilities to specify the DVD drive with no luck. I keep getting a "No boot device available" message in the console window.

Any advice would be appreciated. By the way, I'm trying to install on a MacBook Pro.Ask Parallels. macbeta@parallels.com

or the support site http://www.parallels.com/en/support/mac/ :rolleyes:

petertheman123
Apr 6, 2006, 10:09 AM
why would they call the new ibook a macbook? unless it is only a macbook and not a macbook pro. . .?

sushi
Apr 6, 2006, 10:11 AM
Yes, but even then it would have to be a file deletion risk.

<big snip>
Dave, please re-read what my comment was in response to instead of jumping on me.

BTW, I agree with most of what you said. My issue was with the poster that I replied to that basically stated that nothing could happend outside of the sand box. That is incorrect. However, the likelyhood of that happening is very remote.

Then again, remember Hackers love a challenge! And to have a Winders virus that can jump and upload something that would affect the Mac OS side of the house (underlying Unix or Mac shell) would be a cool thing to do. So who knows, we may just see something like this in the future.

Am I going to loose sleep over it. Nope. But it could happen that is all I am saying.

newamiga
Apr 6, 2006, 10:12 AM
Can someone post a mirror .. I don't know if these guys would mind.. if they are reading this.. can they get a mirror set up?

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 10:13 AM
You have no idea what you are talking about. Boot Camp has Windows residing it it's own partition seperate from everything else- it won't even be able to read the Mac partition. Parallel's solution and Boot Camp are equally likely to be infected; with Parallel's solution, you trash the file and start over, with Boot Camp's solution, you trash the partition and start over.Thanks for setting me straight. :o

artifex
Apr 6, 2006, 10:13 AM
Funny how a couple MR newbies posted saying they just installed this and love it, and then there are more established members who haven't installed it saying it beats Apple's Boot Camp, and even call Apple's solution dangerous.

If I didn't know any better, I'd say we were being astroturfed.

brainwasher
Apr 6, 2006, 10:14 AM
Wow - seems we are experiencing a virtual tsunami of windows on mac these days... Gawd damn I'm curious to see some benchmarks soon. If this will open up for all the lovely 3d and other design apps (Ooh Rhino, app of my dreams) that has never been made for a mac I'm a happy guy... but it does demand that it works, more or less, at native speed as promised.




It is impossible to use os x on a windows pc.

A

sure it is forbidden to run osx on a pc but it completely possibile, thousands of people have installed osx on pc, incredible someone still don't believe that

Stridder44
Apr 6, 2006, 10:15 AM
If I didn't know any better, I'd say we were being astroturfed.



Gazoontite

zapp
Apr 6, 2006, 10:16 AM
I benchmarked OS X, Parrallels, and Boot camp on my Macbook pro 1.83 with 1.5 GRam


Action ,OSX ,Parrallel ,boot camp
Rendering (Single CPU): ,282 ,520 , 202
Rendering (Multiple CPU): ,516 ,--- ,486

Multiprocessor Speedup: ,1.83,___, 2.41

Shading (CINEMA 4D) ,328 ,891 ,229
Shading (OpenGL Soft Li) : ,774 ,595 ,949
Shading (OpenGL Hard Li) : ,1404 ,454 ,2181

OpenGL Speedup: 4.28 0.67 9.54

LosJackal
Apr 6, 2006, 10:16 AM
http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51
Maybe its just me... but I would NEVER be surfing the web running WinXP on my iMac no matter how cool it could be.

Heh, usually me neither, just for browser testing. But being an XP install that was 5 minutes old, I didn't have much else to test with.

Any suggestions?

-Carlos
www.prodedgy.com

m-dogg
Apr 6, 2006, 10:18 AM
Boy, with how excited everyone seems to be getting about this, you'd think we were all at www.windowsrumors.com! :p

While I'm happy for those that want/need to run windows on thier mac now that they'll have not just one but two different options, I also know that I won't be using either of them (I don't game, and I don't have any business needs).

flahiker
Apr 6, 2006, 10:18 AM
Does anyone know if USB is enabled in the VM?

vaporeso
Apr 6, 2006, 10:20 AM
Parallels site is down now to download the trial version. I registered hours ago and still no key, anybody received it and can share it? I am just too eager to see this.

Macnoviz
Apr 6, 2006, 10:20 AM
why would they call the new ibook a macbook? unless it is only a macbook and not a macbook pro. . .?

Are you sure you're in the right thread?
off topic: I do agree that iBook sounds better than Macbook

ebow
Apr 6, 2006, 10:22 AM
Does anyone know if USB is enabled in the VM?

Wouldn't it have to be, to get the keyboard and mouse to work?

artifex
Apr 6, 2006, 10:22 AM
Gazoontite

Thanks! I'm assuming you know what it means. But, for anyone who doesn't know, yet... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing)

mac jones
Apr 6, 2006, 10:23 AM
Well those benches don't look like 'native' to me.

And what ever happened to 'catious optimisim' ?

this thread is dern wacky. Hype and crazyness.

Stridder44
Apr 6, 2006, 10:24 AM
And what ever happened to 'catious optimisim' ?

this thread is dern wacky. Hype and crazyness.


Welcome to the past 2 days

j-a-x
Apr 6, 2006, 10:24 AM
Wow!
After Apple's Boot Camp I didn't think it was going to get any better. This is amazing!

maxvamp
Apr 6, 2006, 10:25 AM
While this costs $49 and Apple's solution is Free, I can see how this might make Apple have to really bring out the big guns for Leopard. This will do ANY VERSION of Windows AND Linux. Amazing. I believe that Apple will do one better with Leopard... It'll run all PC software/Linux software and ... wait for it... MAC software! And all run WITHOUT the glitches. Sound works, Keyboards, video cams, etc... all work!

Have an old Mac game that you haven't played because Classic was damn to the Information highway to hell? No problem with Leopard.

Nintendo's newest system (Revolution) will be able to play all Nintendo console games ever... why not Apple?


I think that for Apple , the concept of supporting many OSs on the PCMac would be a nightmare. By supporting only a limited number of Windows Versions, they may be able to gain some favours from Billy Gates, and at the same time gain market share.

As an OS/2 guy until 2001, This does not leave me with warm and fuzzys.

As for the virtualization..... The Windows running in a window will be nearly as fast as a native running version. However, since the video calls are made to a generic SVGA driver as setup in the Parallels environment, 3D games are clearly out.

For most of us doing business related work on our machines, this is not an issue. For game time, however, we need to reboot.

The solution may be BOOT CAMP and PARRALLELS.

Max.

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 10:27 AM
So if Apple do include some form of win xp support in 10.5 (as confirmed by boot camp) & it utilizes vitrualisation (as rumored by just about everyone) it wont be supported on Mini's ???

Can anyone say "firmware update commin up" ?Minis are supported by Parallels. Minis Get Software Virtualization That Is Almost As Fast AS Hardware. :)

gkhaldi
Apr 6, 2006, 10:27 AM
Funny how a couple MR newbies posted saying they just installed this and love it, and then there are more established members who haven't installed it saying it beats Apple's Boot Camp, and even call Apple's solution dangerous.

If I didn't know any better, I'd say we were being astroturfed.

I've been a reader / member for quiet a while now but I post very little. When I saw earlier this week that Parallels was going to come out with this solution, I got so excited I checked their website very 2-3hrs or so.

I have a lot of experience with VMWare, VM (mainframe technology from IBM) VM/VSE, LPAR, DLPAR, and different other forms of virtualisation.

I downloaded the Bootcamp solution but decided not to install for 3 reasons:

I'm running on a production machine and the resizing of a disk (OS X home drive) scares me.

Secondly, I could screw up under OS X since OS X can read the file system (or write in case of a FAT file system)

I don't know about some of the viruses under windows and if they would be able to corrupt another file system.

The Parallels solution is not so bad for me. It gives me a virtual environment where I can create different sandboxes that all run near native speeds. I created a clean install XP PRO SP2 with firewall and anti-virus sw. All I need to do now is to copy that "file" to have a clean install that I can screw up evry now and then.

I truly believe this Parallels virtualisation software has a lot of merit.

I still have to try out 2 things:

Can I start a virtual machine / harddrive created with VMWare?
Can I install OS X under Parallels ?

My 2c ;)

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 10:28 AM
Funny how a couple MR newbies posted saying they just installed this and love it, and then there are more established members who haven't installed it saying it beats Apple's Boot Camp, and even call Apple's solution dangerous.

If I didn't know any better, I'd say we were being astroturfed.

Just FYI, I have no relationship whatsoever to Parallels, as my sig and affiliations should clearly show.

Try it. It's *that* good. When you can see for yourself how the performance is, you'll be "astroturfing" too.

(And for the record, anyone saying Boot Camp is "dangerous" doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. I didn't respond to any of them because I thought most people wouldn't even pay attention to them...)

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu

Multimedia
Apr 6, 2006, 10:31 AM
Kind of a stretch to say "almost every" MacIntel, but then admit that the Mini isn't included.

At least the Parallels engineers seem to be honest, even if the marketing folks have a tendency towards dubious claims. (This isn't the only bit of hype on those pages.)The Mini is included Alden. Minis Get Software Virtualization That Is Almost As Fast AS Hardware V. :)

morespce54
Apr 6, 2006, 10:31 AM
Can someone please hurry up and try it out?

...or at least, mirrored the links... the system is sooooo busy !

iPie
Apr 6, 2006, 10:34 AM
This is great news, and Linux too!

Now I can finally get that new Mac, well as soon as they come out with the 13" (in June......).

I guess this was the great Apple release for April.

Now we need to wait until May for something new.

Photorun
Apr 6, 2006, 10:35 AM
Funny how a couple MR newbies posted saying they just installed this and love it, and then there are more established members who haven't installed it saying it beats Apple's Boot Camp, and even call Apple's solution dangerous.

If I didn't know any better, I'd say we were being astroturfed.

Well I'm an established member who has installed it, errr, my assistant did and we've been marvelling it not sure what to try. Sadly we're also trying to work (gets in the way). Boot camp is on one lab machine and the other is running Virtualization and they're both running xpee. How well? We don't know yet.. but they both seem work for what it's worth.

Eric5h5
Apr 6, 2006, 10:37 AM
But won't drivers for those be right around the corner? :confused:

No. Virtualization makes direct access to hardware impossible. That doesn't mean that 3D acceleration etc. is out of the question--there are several ways to approach the problem--but don't expect anything "right around the corner."

--Eric

strange days
Apr 6, 2006, 10:44 AM
woah, this is the real deal ( finally )...

...let's have leopard deliver virtualization feats and play catch up :cool:

sfwalter
Apr 6, 2006, 10:46 AM
I can't seem to get the Parallels sw to install Windows XP Pro (using the same installation disk I used yesterday with Boot Camp). I tried /dev/rdisk1s0 and other possibilities to specify the DVD drive with no luck. I keep getting a "No boot device available" message in the console window.

Any advice would be appreciated. By the way, I'm trying to install on a MacBook Pro.

According the Parallels forums its a known issue. To get around it.

1. Quit Parallels if its running
2. Insert the disc into the drvei
3. Start Parallels

Island Dog
Apr 6, 2006, 10:46 AM
I have to accelerate my plans to get an Intel Mac now.

dr_lha
Apr 6, 2006, 10:48 AM
Funny how a couple MR newbies posted saying they just installed this and love it, and then there are more established members who haven't installed it saying it beats Apple's Boot Camp, and even call Apple's solution dangerous.

If I didn't know any better, I'd say we were being astroturfed.

I'm not sure why you think this. In essence what Parallels does is nothing amazing, its just the first time we've seen this sort of virtualization technology on the Mac.

Of course the main reason for this is because no other operating system of note ran on under PPC, so software like this was of no real use before.

Around 5-6 years ago I was using VMware to do exactly what Parallels does now on a Linux machine. The project I worked on used entirely Linux, but our documentation had to be done in Word, so I ran Win98SE under VMWare. It worked great then, and I'm sure Parallels works great now.

At least for running desktop apps, games are really out of the question.

mrplow
Apr 6, 2006, 10:49 AM
I'm running it on my MacBook Pro.

Pros - LIGHTNING FAST!

Cons - Definitely still a beta. It didn't like my DVD drive, so I had to put in the raw device name ("/dev/rdisk1") in the program. Also caused my MBP to reboot during the Windows install (yes, the entire machine).

I'm trying Win XP Home, but if it crashes in the install again, I'm going to opt for XP Professional.

I'll post more details when I get them.


i still can't get it to acknowledge my DVD drive on my MBP... when i start the VM it says 'no boot device available, press Enter to continue' anyone have a solution??

janstett
Apr 6, 2006, 10:50 AM
<Re: running OSX on a PC> It is impossible. It has been tried before, but you don't get a stable system. More crashes than Windows 3.1 :rolleyes: And: it's illegal.

It is not impossible. I've been running 10.4.3 and 10.4.5 on a Gateway for months. It's pretty stable, the worst thing I can say is I have an nVidia card which isn't supported, the MacVidia project drivers for it aren't so great.

Now, this is not officially supported by Apple (yet) but the technology is there. All Apple has to do is remove the TPM code, and possibly include an SSE2->SSE3 emulator. The hackers are already doing this.

bubbalwz
Apr 6, 2006, 10:52 AM
Since Vmware has opened up their spec for their hard disk format (http://www.vmware.com/news/releases/vmdk.html), it would be nice to either include a conversion tool to the Parallels format or for Parallels to support the vmdk format natively. This way you could use an image on Linux, Windows, or Mac and it would work fine in all cases.

Another feature I would like to see (and it may already be possible) is for Parallels to use a native installation (i.e. BootCamp installed copy) of Windows so users could boot into native mode and get full Windows performance, or boot the same copy of Windows up via Parallels. This way you wouldn't have to maintain applications/updates/etc in a Virtual image as well as a native image. I realize there would be issues with differing drivers, but this should be fairly easy to work around.

IMHO, Having these two features added to Parallels would definately sell more copies.

skochan
Apr 6, 2006, 10:52 AM
Just make an ISO image of the XP installation disc using something like Disk Utility or Toast and point it at that. That's all you need to do. I and many others have already installed Windows XP and other OSes this way in Parallels.

The fact that the "Use real CD/DVD ROM" is grayed out might also be a small clue that using a real CD is unsupported by Parallels in the current beta. ;-)

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu

Thanks for the advice. I did actually get the CD/DVD ROM to be "ungrayed" after inserting a CD into the drive, so I assumed it worked. By the way, I did have to delete my VM file and start over for it to work. I must have gotten it into some weird state.

ChrisA
Apr 6, 2006, 10:56 AM
Great timming. As I type this, I have in another window a copy of VMWare Server running. I'm actually installing a few copies of Linux in VMs on a Linux machine. I need access to multiple Linux computers to support my software testing. The host OS is Linux too but now it need not be.

Next year I can envision a small virtual server farm running on a high-end quad core Intel Power Mac.

This has uses other then imply running Window-only games

mrplow
Apr 6, 2006, 10:56 AM
Thanks for the advice. I did actually get the CD/DVD ROM to be "ungrayed" after inserting a CD into the drive, so I assumed it worked. By the way, I did have to delete my VM file and start over for it to work. I must have gotten it into some weird state.

I just got DVD working... delete the CD Drive that's there (that Parallel's sets to an image) shut it off.. reload parallels.. insert XP cd (or any most likely) and then goto add DVD drive again.. click..click..save..Start. worked for me!

Backtothemac
Apr 6, 2006, 10:59 AM
I cannot open the DMG file. Is anyone else having this problem?

nostaws
Apr 6, 2006, 11:01 AM
I have been reading but don't find mention of USB drivers/devices - anyone know if parallel support it? - I would prefer "virtualization" to the dual boot, but I need usb support offered by the dual boot option.

dr_lha
Apr 6, 2006, 11:02 AM
I cannot open the DMG file. Is anyone else having this problem?
Did you download it using a Mac or Windows?

EDIT: This may seem like a silly question, but I just downloaded it using my windows laptop and transferred it to my Mac with a USB key, and it wouldn't mount. Downloading using Safari did work however.

ChrisA
Apr 6, 2006, 11:04 AM
Wouldn't it have to be, to get the keyboard and mouse to work?

No, my machine right here ha USB KB/Mouse and the VMs it hosts don't have USB.

VM's don't have to work by sharing the physical hardware. The OS in the VM make a call to a driver to get a ketstoke from a keyboard and the VM gets the character from where ever it wants to get it, liky from the host OS's driver but possibly from a script or file, a second keyboard, internet connection.

Yes the last one is real. VMWare allows for remote control of a VM over the network

rvillanu
Apr 6, 2006, 11:04 AM
Any .NET developers out there with an MBP and Parallels?

I build Compact Framework apps in VS2005. From the descriptions of Parallels, and my previous experience with 'native' VM software (VMWare on PC), I'd imagine that Visual Studio itself will run absolutely fine.

But can anyone out there try to connect a PocketPC device (via USB cradle) and see if ActiveSync/Visual Studio detect and deploy to it correctly?

If so, then 'goodbye' to every single PC I own, and work can take their Dell back :)

Raises Hand.

I'm curious too if this works similar to VM Ware. I would like to setup IIS/SQL Server 2000 and IIS/SQL Server 2005 and VS 2005 on seperate VMs. I would also like to access the websites from my Mac and push by graphics/flash files to the VMs.

The VM solution would work better for me as I would like multiple development environments with a master backup in case I trash the Windows Server.

I'm curious about PPC and SmartPhone app development also. I know with VM Ware you would have to tell the the VM about the USB port so it could recognize devices and mount external drives, I hope this does the same too.

This is so awesome!! I already told my boss to repurpose my Toshiba Laptop and need a MBP. I currently have an iMac at home and he said test it out first and get back to him. Woot!

QCassidy352
Apr 6, 2006, 11:06 AM
wow, this is SO much better than boot-camp. I hate the idea of dual booting and being at the mercy of windows. This allows me to keep windows in a nice little cage, still at the control of OS X. Bravo! :D

iBunny
Apr 6, 2006, 11:09 AM
This is great... First Boot camp by apple... and now this by Parrallel... this is what is going to happen next....

OS 10.5 will have the best of ALL worlds. We will have Native Dual Booting, and we will have the option to run Windows In a Window (within OS10.5) Fully hardware functional.

I cannot WAIT for 10.5

HornetOSX
Apr 6, 2006, 11:11 AM
Kind of a stretch to say "almost every" MacIntel, but then admit that the Mini isn't included.

At least the Parallels engineers seem to be honest, even if the marketing folks have a tendency towards dubious claims. (This isn't the only bit of hype on those pages.)

Ok this pissed me off enuff to post .. I read this site constantly but never post.

Lets look at the number of models of intelMacs.

6 ( 7 if you count the 2.16 MacBook Pro as a seperate machine which I won't for this comparison)

Out of those 2 do not use the Intel VT-x setting

So 66.6667( yes I rounded off) DO have Intel Virtualization Technology
and 33.3334 ( again rounded off) do NOT have it


I belive that qualifies as " almost every"

or you coud make it MORE simple...

2models do ( iMAc and MacBook)
1 does not ( Mini)

that means 1 does not .. but all the others do? so almost every one eh?

bubbalwz
Apr 6, 2006, 11:15 AM
Raises Hand.

I'm curious too if this works similar to VM Ware. I would like to setup IIS/SQL Server 2000 and IIS/SQL Server 2005 and VS 2005 on seperate VMs. I would also like to access the websites from my Mac and push by graphics/flash files to the VMs.

The VM solution would work better for me as I would like multiple development environments with a master backup in case I trash the Windows Server.

I'm curious about PPC and SmartPhone app development also. I know with VM Ware you would have to tell the the VM about the USB port so it could recognize devices and mount external drives, I hope this does the same too.

This is so awesome!! I already told my boss to repurpose my Toshiba Laptop and need a MBP. I currently have an iMac at home and he said test it out first and get back to him. Woot!

USB devices are not supported in this version of the beta: http://forum.parallels.com/thread72.html

artifex
Apr 6, 2006, 11:15 AM
Just FYI, I have no relationship whatsoever to Parallels, as my sig and affiliations should clearly show.

Try it. It's *that* good. When you can see for yourself how the performance is, you'll be "astroturfing" too.

(And for the record, anyone saying Boot Camp is "dangerous" doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. I didn't respond to any of them because I thought most people wouldn't even pay attention to them...)

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu


That's fine, Dave. How long have you been running it on your Mini? This is the first day I've heard of this product, but I guess you got up earlier than I did :) Oh, and unfortunately, I can't try either BC or this right now, as my current Mini is a G4. I'd like to see if the Intel Minis will take Meroms before buying a new one, or at least wait until mine's a year old :)

dr_lha
Apr 6, 2006, 11:15 AM
EDIT: Sorry - I misread the post.

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 11:17 AM
Thanks for the advice. I did actually get the CD/DVD ROM to be "ungrayed" after inserting a CD into the drive, so I assumed it worked. By the way, I did have to delete my VM file and start over for it to work. I must have gotten it into some weird state.

Ah, ok.

Yeah, true CD/DVD support is a little shaky right now. If you still have troubles, you can use the ISO method.

SamJ
Apr 6, 2006, 11:18 AM
hmmm... great idea! i wonder how much of a ram hog this will be:confused:

artifex
Apr 6, 2006, 11:20 AM
Can I start a virtual machine / harddrive created with VMWare?
Can I install OS X under Parallels ?
My 2c ;)

I doubt you can start VMWare images, unless Parallels claims full compatibility with them. You certainly can try, though :)
I doubt you'll be able to install OSX under it without hacking, as it likely doesn't include an EFI emulator. You could probably do whatever people are doing when they install OSX on non-Macs. I don't think the legality would be in question, either, if you're doing it on your Mac :)

bubbalwz
Apr 6, 2006, 11:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/AC_DuAUTHWI

artifex
Apr 6, 2006, 11:23 AM
Well I'm an established member who has installed it, errr, my assistant did and we've been marvelling it not sure what to try. Sadly we're also trying to work (gets in the way). Boot camp is on one lab machine and the other is running Virtualization and they're both running xpee. How well? We don't know yet.. but they both seem work for what it's worth.

That's cool. A friend of mine just messaged me and said he's gotten a kernel panic already, on his MBP, right after (during? he was cut off) install. Still, it's a beta :)

1macker1
Apr 6, 2006, 11:23 AM
I'd rather go the Boot Camp route. Having to allocate your RAM is a ****** thing to have to do. I'd rather be running full steam in whichever OS I decide to boot up in.

vamp07
Apr 6, 2006, 11:24 AM
hmmm... great idea! i wonder how much of a ram hog this will be:confused:


One of the nice things about these solutions is that you can assign 256 to Windows but in reality Parallels will grab what it really needs. Essentially the virtual memory windows requests is real memory but the emulator is taking care of that piece. I have 1 gig in MBP and no problems here running multiple apps simultaneously with Parallel xp machine.

1macker1
Apr 6, 2006, 11:25 AM
How about some Benchmarks.
One of the nice things about these solutions is that you can assign 256 to Windows but in reality Parallels will grab what it really needs. Essentially the virtual memory windows requests is real memory but the emulator is taking care of that piece. I have 1 gig in MBP and no problems here running multiple apps simultaneously with Parallel xp machine.

displaced
Apr 6, 2006, 11:27 AM
USB devices are not supported in this version of the beta: http://forum.parallels.com/thread72.html

No problem, I'll wait and see how the final release looks.

... though as a bit of fun, I wonder if the VM sees the Mac's "serial" ports (e.g. Bluetooth Serial ports?). Deploying a big VS project to a PDA over Bluetooth will be slow... but pretty cool ;)

guez
Apr 6, 2006, 11:29 AM
Let's say you really prefer Windows, but you think it's cooler to have a Mac. Now you have the perfect solution. The price of a Mac without having to deal with all of that weird Apple software. AWESOME!

bug
Apr 6, 2006, 11:32 AM
Please tell me that it is impossible to use os x on a windows pc. If not, good night apple.

I feel that if you actually think this, then you don't really understand Mac users.

It isn't about the price. I have an extremely high end PC that was certainly less expensive than my G5, and even if I could run OS X on it, I'd still have an actual Apple for OS X. I don't know why, and I can't really explain it, but I'm sure enough other people here agree with me that Apple would certainly not be doomed.

...if anything this may encourage some Windows users to buy Macs even if they only intend on running Windows on it.

1macker1
Apr 6, 2006, 11:33 AM
No one would do this. Believe it or not, there are some 'cool' looking Windows PCs. The Sony Vaio series are quite nice. (some of them)
Let's say you really prefer Windows, but you think it's cooler to have a Mac. Now you have the perfect solution. The price of a Mac without having to deal with all of that weird Apple software. AWESOME!

nagromme
Apr 6, 2006, 11:34 AM
Boot Camp is free (and I'll be buying Leopard anyway I'm sure). But virtualization for $50? Once I have an Intel Mac and all options have gotten thorough reviews, that's a very tempting deal.

Virtualized Windows is more secure, and much, much easier to work with compared to booting Windows.

I COULD survive with Boot Camp because my occasional need for Windows is for testing I can do offline. But two OS's on one screen is just too cool :) (I'd never dare connect non-virtualized Windows to the Internet because I have zero desire to waste time and money defending Windows and becoming a Windows security expert.)

I'd like to see MS compete too, with a new VPC.

iomar
Apr 6, 2006, 11:34 AM
wow.. wow,


Just when I was thninking of buying Apple stock. It jumped 10 points... now I am not sure to wait.. or should I still buy. I think this is a great announcement and this should bring a lot of PC users in to the Mac.

LosJackal
Apr 6, 2006, 11:35 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/AC_DuAUTHWI

I see your sig...this video was created on a fully loaded Intel iMac, which supports VT. NB: On a Mac mini, Parallels is saying they can only emulate VT in software right now, Apple has apparently disabled it for some reason...so count on the performance being slower on the mini, unfortunately.

-Carlos
www.prodedgy.com

SpaceMagic
Apr 6, 2006, 11:36 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/AC_DuAUTHWI

Wow :eek:

1macker1
Apr 6, 2006, 11:37 AM
Why are people so happy with another type of VPC. I fail to see the greatness in this product. BC is the way to go.

supremedesigner
Apr 6, 2006, 11:37 AM
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30818 :rolleyes:

1macker1
Apr 6, 2006, 11:39 AM
link doesn't work
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30818 :rolleyes:

vaporeso
Apr 6, 2006, 11:40 AM
Anybody else waiting for the trial key for hours?!?

Already registered with 2 different addresses and nothing.

Can't I just somebody else's?! I mean this is a public beta.

Yes, I'm a newbie, so what? Throw me a freakin bone.

dr_lha
Apr 6, 2006, 11:41 AM
Anybody else waiting for the trial key for hours?!?

Already registered with 2 different addresses and nothing.

Can't I just somebody else's?! I mean this is a public beta.

Yes, I'm a newbie, so what? Throw me a freakin bone.

Did you click on "Send Key" on the download page?

I got mine instantly.

LagunaSol
Apr 6, 2006, 11:41 AM
...I'd like to see MS compete...

Now there's an oxymoron!

mrplow
Apr 6, 2006, 11:42 AM
anyone try installing the bootcamp drivers yet into parallels?
the installer crashes at the "GetModelInfo" so obviously it doesn't like parallel's bios... im going to extract the drivers from my bootcamp install on iMac. I don't think there should be an issue since VT is inuse..

Romanesq
Apr 6, 2006, 11:42 AM
Here it is:

http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51

Dude, I don't know who to applaud you or the folks at parallels.
That's in one word, simply amazing.

For those of us who must use an app or two in windows, these are heady times. Since I have a mini solo, I'm going to have to use Boot Camp. But for anyone using the other mac intel machines, this is very impressive.

Where is this going? Initially I know it should help sales with a certain segment but I'm not so sure corporate will buy into it. It may be more of the case where individuals justify the purchase and overcome objections.

It would be great to understand better what the roadmap is from Apple's perspective. Steve Jobs is one heady risk taker. :p

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 11:43 AM
I see your sig...this video was created on a fully loaded Intel iMac, which supports VT. NB: On a Mac mini, Parallels is saying they can only emulate VT in software right now, Apple has apparently disabled it for some reason...so count on the performance being slower on the mini, unfortunately.

-Carlos
www.prodedgy.com

Not much slower.

They're not "emulating VT in software".

They're doing software virtualization. This is the way every desktop virtualization product up to now - things like VMware Workstation and Virtual PC for Windows - has done it. And it's still *very* fast. The x86 calls are still getting passed as directly as possible to the software.

VT simply allows this to be done a lot more effectively and efficiently, and directly to hardware (among other things).

Parallels is the first desktop virtual machine product to even support VT. It's by no means slow on the Intel Mac mini.

Fortunately, anyone with an Intel Mac mini can just download it and see for themselves.

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 11:44 AM
anyone try installing the bootcamp drivers yet into parallels?
the installer crashes at the "GetModelInfo" so obviously it doesn't like parallel's bios... im going to extract the drivers from my bootcamp install on iMac. I don't think there should be an issue since VT is inuse..

Um, dude, that won't work. Like, at all. The only hardware Parallels presents directly to Windows is the CPU. None of the Boot Camp drivers will work. As far as an OS running inside of Parallels is concerned, it doesn't even see the Mac hardware.

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu

mozmac
Apr 6, 2006, 11:46 AM
This answers my "No Outlook on the Mac" problem. As soon as Apple as a second button to the MacBook Pro, I am picking one up.

THIS IS A GREAT DAY FOR THE COMPUTER WORLD.

spade
Apr 6, 2006, 11:47 AM
I have to say I'm impressed so far. Downloaded the beta and within 25 mins I have XP SP2 up and running, and rather quickly at that. I've not had a good play with it but it seems stable, quick, and networking seems to be there, I could certainly "see" the host machine that has Windows Sharing running. Very impressive so far.

I am now installing 98SE to see how that hold up. So far the install is a lot slower than XP, and I expected it to be quicker, but hey, if it installs and networking is as it should be, then great.


You sir are a masochist, will you try MS-DOS next? :)

I do have a question for everyone, I have an old copy of XP, can someone link to easy setup page or simple directions to burn an SP2 disc. Thanks.

mrplow
Apr 6, 2006, 11:48 AM
Um, dude, that won't work. Like, at all. The only hardware Parallels presents directly to Windows is the CPU. None of the Boot Camp drivers will work. As far as an OS running inside of Parallels is concerned, it doesn't even see the Mac hardware.

---
Dave Schroeder
University of Wisconsin - Madison
das@doit.wisc.edu
http://das.doit.wisc.edu


if XP has direct access to the hardware then why couldn't it work?
(I'm not arguing- I'm asking)

bobme
Apr 6, 2006, 11:48 AM
i still can't get it to acknowledge my DVD drive on my MBP... when i start the VM it says 'no boot device available, press Enter to continue' anyone have a solution??

try:
/dev/rdisk1s0

that worked for me. Make sure it has accepted your change.

gauchogolfer
Apr 6, 2006, 11:49 AM
The speed of XP on the prodedgy video is awesome! I can't surf that fast in Safari on my Powerbook....

If I actually needed any Windows software, I'd be all over a new Mac. It's nice to know that this will be standard by the time I'm buying a new one.

Cheers.

FoxyKaye
Apr 6, 2006, 11:53 AM
Great first starts - although I don't intend to replace my current iMac for several more years, it looks like Leopard and 10.6 may be making real leaps regarding running Windows on an Apple (in however form is most convenient for folks).

Although I don't run Windows at all, I've worked with plenty of clients who do - it would be great to have a portable capable of running both OS X and Windows concurrently. I see a nice future-revision MBP in my future running Leopard...

What fun - Apple stock seems to be bouncing well, too: http://quote.morningstar.com/Quote.html?Ticker=AAPL

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 11:54 AM
if XP has direct access to the hardware then why couldn't it work?
(I'm not arguing- I'm asking)

It doesn't have direct access to the hardware. The only hardware it sees in any capacity directly (on VT machines) is the CPU.

Marx55
Apr 6, 2006, 11:55 AM
This is it: a Mactel to use any Mac OS X, Linux or Windows.

This is the final computer to run any OS.

Mac market share will reach 20-30% in a few years from now. Expect more and more Developers to switch to Mac OS X.

milo
Apr 6, 2006, 11:57 AM
Kind of a stretch to say "almost every" MacIntel, but then admit that the Mini isn't included.

At least the Parallels engineers seem to be honest, even if the marketing folks have a tendency towards dubious claims. (This isn't the only bit of hype on those pages.)

So I assume the mini duo is supported, they just don't support any single core boxes?

jlaylor
Apr 6, 2006, 12:05 PM
Well,

I was patient. I downloaded the software, registered.

It's exceptional. It works. It has bugs. It needs beta testers.

but....

It's the solution we've been looking for. No more virtual pc.

By the way....

It also supports Win98 (which is much faster, requires less memory and disk space). If you are trying to run outlook or just a few pc programs, look into Win98 instead of the feature-heavy XP.

Congrats to parallel and those Russian programmers!!!

- Janet

daveschroeder
Apr 6, 2006, 12:05 PM
So I assume the mini duo is supported, they just don't support any single core boxes?

Yes, the Mac mini Core Duo is definitely supported, but doesn't have VT support because it is disabled in the firmware on the Mac mini.

Digitalflick
Apr 6, 2006, 12:06 PM
I finally get to run Party Poker :)

boncellis
Apr 6, 2006, 12:10 PM
I'm glad that the software world is taking on the task of producing a good virtualization solution as it seems that there is more than enough demand for it, but to say that virtualization is "better" than the dual boot option made possible with yesterday's release. I suppose I'm in the minority, but examination software available only for Windows seems to plague my life, and the varying entities responsible for administering the tests I have to take (including the Bar Exam) specifically prohibit virtualization software. I don't know how widespread this is around the country's higher educational facilities, but it would seem that Apple is retaking its prior place within the educational market.

I think one compliments the other, they both have their uses.

chibianh
Apr 6, 2006, 12:10 PM
so many pages to look through so i don't know if this was posted or not..

OSX, Windows, and Linux all on one screen.. *drool*

http://edge.macworld.com/images/content/2006/04/06/parallels.jpg

whatever
Apr 6, 2006, 12:19 PM
Oh my God, Dell just got into the game and released a new computer which can run Windows and play games too!

Check it out:

http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/gaming_xpsdt?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs

Only joking! But come on now. I just read 8 pages of posts. For starters, the only reason Apple released Boot Camp (a great name by the way) was because people wanted it! They didn't have to, but they did. My hats off to them for listening to their customers.

But people, please remember, emulation is not the answer! Native applications is the only true solution!

All adopting and accepting emulation programs with near native Window speeds will do is encourage developers to stop porting and writing code for the Mac and dedicate even more resources to Windows.

FYI, I've been using emulation since the SoftPC days and finally last month I was finally able to stop (when my company finally upgraded our Exchange Server). Sure I still launch VPC, to check some code, but it's no longer running all day. And it's so nice!

Billy Boo Bob
Apr 6, 2006, 12:22 PM
so many pages to look through so i don't know if this was posted or not..

OSX, Windows, and OSX all on one screen.. *drool*

Don't you mean "OSX, Windows, and Linux all on one screen.. *drool*"???

dr_lha
Apr 6, 2006, 12:25 PM
Oh my God, Dell just got into the game and released a new computer which can run Windows and play games too!

Check it out:

http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/gaming_xpsdt?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs

Only joking! But come on now. I just read 8 pages of posts. For starters, the only reason Apple released Boot Camp (a great name by the way) was because people wanted it! They didn't have to, but they did. My hats off to them for listening to their customers.

But people, please remember, emulation is not the answer! Native applications is the only true solution!

All adopting and accepting emulation programs with near native Window speeds will do is encourage developers to stop porting and writing code for the Mac and dedicate even more resources to Windows.

FYI, I've been using emulation since the SoftPC days and finally last month I was finally able to stop (when my company finally upgraded our Exchange Server). Sure I still launch VPC, to check some code, but it's no longer running all day. And it's so nice!

Just to be nit-picky: This is not emulation.

chibianh
Apr 6, 2006, 12:25 PM
Don't you mean "OSX, Windows, and Linux all on one screen.. *drool*"???

Ooops.. corrected... *drool*

LagunaSol
Apr 6, 2006, 12:30 PM
As soon as Apple as a second button to the MacBook Pro, I am picking one up.

You will probably be waiting a long, long time.

My PC laptop has a second button. I hate it. It's awkward to use, so I usually don't.

In fact my PC laptop has four buttons and one of those little eraser-head pointer controls. Talk about a shotgun approach.

Guess what I use? The trackpad and the main button. That's all. And it's not because I'm used to a Mac laptop, because I don't have one.

I may be in the minority, but I'm glad Apple is sticking to simplicity on this.

alltribz
Apr 6, 2006, 12:31 PM
Is anyone else having problems mounting dmg file. I tried to use disk utility to repair it also but no chance. Is there a mirror somewhere with a previous dmg file. I am trying: Parallels-2-1.1.1658.24-Mac.dmg

bretm
Apr 6, 2006, 12:32 PM
This answers my "No Outlook on the Mac" problem. As soon as Apple as a second button to the MacBook Pro, I am picking one up.

THIS IS A GREAT DAY FOR THE COMPUTER WORLD.

Outlook on the Mac is called Entourage now. It's supposed to link into all the same stuff as Outlook on the Windows side.

mmmcheese
Apr 6, 2006, 12:35 PM
This answers my "No Outlook on the Mac" problem. As soon as Apple as a second button to the MacBook Pro, I am picking one up.

THIS IS A GREAT DAY FOR THE COMPUTER WORLD.

A second button? I'm assuming you mean mouse button. Although when sitting at a desk, I prefer to use a multi-button scroll mouse...when I'm using the trackpad, I actually prefer just having the single mouse button. I've had both PC and Mac laptops...and I have decided that more than one mouse button on a trackpad makes using it really uncomfortable for me. But that's just me.

solafide
Apr 6, 2006, 12:40 PM
http://www.prodedgy.com/article/51



It's resized down 50% in ScreenSnapz Pro, but it was running in 1024x768. I tried to keep the cursor moving to prove I wasn't doing any "creative editing" to make it look any better than it already does on its own! Gives you a nice sense of time too.

-Carlos
www.prodedgy.com

I can't seem to get the Flash movie to load. I am using the latest of OS X, Safari, and Flash Player. I have tried flushing the cache. I just get a white box. If I right click - it says "Flash Movie not Loaded". Any suggestions?

GekkePrutser
Apr 6, 2006, 12:46 PM
The problem is probably that Apple disabled Intel's VT technology for the Mac Mini series.

No, your Core Solo does not support VT. Only the Core Duo does. I'd link to the Intel specifications page but I don't have it to hand at the moment, sorry... But none of the current Core Solo's support VT, and all the Duo's do.

dr_lha
Apr 6, 2006, 12:47 PM
No, your Core Solo does not support VT. Only the Core Duo does. I'd link to the Intel specifications page but I don't have it to hand at the moment, sorry... But none of the current Core Solo's support VT, and all the Duo's do.
As many have said before however, Parallels will still work without VT support.

mark88
Apr 6, 2006, 12:50 PM
The speed of XP on the prodedgy video is awesome! I can't surf that fast in Safari on my Powerbook....

That's because Safari is one of the slowest browsers on the face of the planet.

mackeeper
Apr 6, 2006, 12:52 PM
Who the hell cares about all this stuff?!?!? I just want Apple to announce something for heaven's sake!!!!! Show me a new iPod, a new iBook....something!!! I'm pissed off at Apple - they havent done anything to show theyre loyal following that theyve turned 30.

SangLad
Apr 6, 2006, 12:52 PM
Now I am hearing the Intel Mac Mini Core Due has been disabled for VT. Is this correct? What's up with that? I mean, is this some minor fault on Apple? or was it intentionally on Apple's part?

Did anyone using Intel Mac Mini Duo installed Parallel's software? If so, how is the performance? Please write what your Intel Mac Mini Core Duo spec is (i.e. how much RAM and etc.).

Thanks!

mark88
Apr 6, 2006, 12:54 PM
You will probably be waiting a long, long time.

My PC laptop has a second button. I hate it. It's awkward to use, so I usually don't.

In fact my PC laptop has four buttons and one of those little eraser-head pointer controls. Talk about a shotgun approach.

Guess what I use? The trackpad and the main button. That's all. And it's not because I'm used to a Mac laptop, because I don't have one.

I may be in the minority, but I'm glad Apple is sticking to simplicity on this.

I thought it was weird for Apple to introduce the new MacBook Pro's with only one mouse button, given the fact that all new Macs ship with a 3 button mice.

Personally, I think the 1 button trackpad is lame. I don't understand how you can hate a second button? it's just another button, if you don't like it, don't press it?

I dunno, to me it's much easier to to move my other finger than it is to move my other hand and hold down Cntrl on the keyboard.

slffl
Apr 6, 2006, 12:59 PM
I thought it was weird for Apple to introduce the new MacBook Pro's with only one mouse button, given the fact that all new Macs ship with a 3 button mice.

Personally, I think the 1 button trackpad is lame. I don't understand how you can hate a second button? it's just another button, if you don't like it, don't press it?

I dunno, to me it's much easier to to move my other finger than it is to move my other hand and hold down Cntrl on the keyboard.

Have you ever used a mac laptop? Most people who want a 2nd mouse button havn't. I have used a powerbook for the past 3 years. The day they add a 2nd mouse button is the day I stop using a powerbook.

First there is a lot less using the mouse in OSX because it's so easy to get around using the keyboard.

Second, you can also right mouse click by putting 2 fingers on the trackpad and clicking.

asphalt-proof
Apr 6, 2006, 01:01 PM
It seems to me that the next step in this progression is that Apple will enable OSX to run Windows porgrams natively without a Windows install. That would be a great selling point for users. Imagine having the conveince of of both OSs but not have to pay for the Windows. THink this will be the killer feature in Leopard?

scienceguy
Apr 6, 2006, 01:03 PM
That's because Safari is one of the slowest browsers on the face of the planet.

Safari on PPC may be slower than Firefox on Windows, but judging by the demonstration at Macworld, it looks like the Intel version of Safari is actually the fastest on the planet. As close to instantaneous as you can get.

dr_lha
Apr 6, 2006, 01:03 PM
Have you ever used a mac laptop? Most people who want a 2nd mouse button havn't. I have used a powerbook for the past 3 years. The day they add a 2nd mouse button is the day I stop using a powerbook.

First there is a lot less using the mouse in OSX because it's so easy to get around using the keyboard.

Second, you can also right mouse click by putting 2 fingers on the trackpad and clicking.
One button is all very well and good, but unfortunately some of us need to run X11 apps for work, so three buttons is needed.

That said, I very quickly got used to command clicking and option clicking on my PB, and it no longer bothers me.

LeeTom
Apr 6, 2006, 01:04 PM
they havent done anything to show theyre loyal following that theyve turned 30.

Dude, I'd hate to go to YOUR birthday party!

Kelmon
Apr 6, 2006, 01:04 PM
Bugger. This brings up a bit of a conundrum. Do I (hyperthetically speaking, since I don't have an Intel Mac yet) install Boot Camp so that I can play a few of my games and get rid of my old PC, or use Parallel so that I can run Windows at the same time as OS X, or do I do both and sacrifice tons of disk space? The VT route is preferable since I don't much want to have to save all my documents and reboot each time I wish to use an application on the other OS. But I'd still like to be able to play Dawn of War or a few other games at a decent speed (my old PC isn't very quick)...

Oh, the dillema...

dejo
Apr 6, 2006, 01:06 PM
Personally, I think the 1 button trackpad is lame. I don't understand how you can hate a second button? it's just another button, if you don't like it, don't press it?

Please, let's not start this debate again! The one-button versus two-button has been argued to death. It has as many zealots on either side as the Mac OS X vs. Windows debate I think.

I dunno, to me it's much easier to to move my other finger than it is to move my other hand and hold down Cntrl on the keyboard.

Where is your other hand when not on the keyboard? ;)

dylansm
Apr 6, 2006, 01:10 PM
As a professional web designer and developer, I am really excited about this. To be able to test sites from one machine in real time, without a re-boot is really a necessity.

One fatal flaw with Virtual PC was that you couldn't view the host's Apache sites because it used the same IP address as the host. Can anyone tell me whether Parallels Workstation uses the host's IP address, or does it have it's own? If anyone has installed this and is hosting test sites on their host OS X Apache, can you tell me whether you can view those sites (as served from Apache) from Win XP? (Hint: to find your IP in Windows, go to the command-prompt and type ipconfig)

That would be fan-tastic.

For those who don't understand the merits of running Windows or any other OS on a Mac, I offer this advice: try to think of your Mac as a tool. Not everyone has the same use case. The more versatile it can be, the more valuable (at least to me).

mark88
Apr 6, 2006, 01:11 PM
Have you ever used a mac laptop? Most people who want a 2nd mouse button havn't. I have used a powerbook for the past 3 years. The day they add a 2nd mouse button is the day I stop using a powerbook.

First there is a lot less using the mouse in OSX because it's so easy to get around using the keyboard.

Second, you can also right mouse click by putting 2 fingers on the trackpad and clicking.

I have a powerbook thank you very much.

You use a 1 button mouse on your desktop too I assume? I mean, why bother complicating things..

Seems rather extreme to say you wouldn't buy one if they divided the single button into two. What difference would it make exactly? AFAICS you'd just have to press a little to the left and you'd have still have the exact same laptop, ignore the right button completely.

tmornini
Apr 6, 2006, 01:16 PM
I only use Windows under Virtual PC to test web sites I am designing, so I have no need or desire to reboot into Windows (if I could).

You, and all web designers *everywhere*, need to know about this:

http://www.browsercam.com (http://www.browsercam.com/)

cann11
Apr 6, 2006, 01:19 PM
As a professional web designer and developer, I am really excited about this. To be able to test sites from one machine in real time, without a re-boot is really a necessity.

One fatal flaw with Virtual PC was that you couldn't view the host's Apache sites because it used the same IP address as the host. Can anyone tell me whether Parallels Workstation uses the host's IP address, or does it have it's own? If anyone has installed this and is hosting test sites on their host OS X Apache, can you tell me whether you can view those sites (as served from Apache) from Win XP? (Hint: to find your IP in Windows, go to the command-prompt and type ipconfig)

That would be fan-tastic.

For those who don't understand the merits of running Windows or any other OS on a Mac, I offer this advice: try to think of your Mac as a tool. Not everyone has the same use case. The more versatile it can be, the more valuable (at least to me).


Before 10.4 (or was it 10.3) broke vp 6 for me I was running windows on my powerbook, now I only run vp 2004 on my windows machines.

Each virtural machine showed up with a seperate IP on my router, so I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Anyway it is best to access the sites by the server name vs. the ip.
You should not configure vp to use virtual nat however.

cyberddot
Apr 6, 2006, 01:29 PM
I didn't write it yesterday, since so many others were, but WOW! I am going to start boxing up my *ell I-6000 laptop for a friend that has expressed interest. I actually passed up getting an Apple lap' because I needed the Windows on a portable for moonlighting. Apple gave ME a gift for their birfday, even if it is gonna cost me.

I agree, these 2 days have been a bit spooky as 30th anniversary celebrations go, but nobody can say that Apple didn't do anything innovative in April 2006.