I don't know if I'm special, or just plain lucky, but I've only seen the ad (aka. product offer) once after upgrade (I use Parallels 7) which I dismissed with "Don't show again" checkbox. I've never seen the ad(s) again.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Parallels 8 or VMWare 5
- Thread starter LePigeonBleu
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't know if I'm special, or just plain lucky, but I've only seen the ad (aka. product offer) once after upgrade (I use Parallels 7) which I dismissed with "Don't show again" checkbox. I've never seen the ad(s) again.
No, the other way around actually: boot camp outperforms virtualisation when it comes to 3D stuff. There is much less overhead (directer access to the gpu) and the drivers are much better (3D in a vm is quite a challenge, it is still very early days).
I originally used Fusion because of its stability. Then, I bought Parallels 7 because it was the only one at the time to offer OpenGL Linux support, making it the only choice if you wanted to use Fedora or some other version of Linux with Gnome 3. Now, I have regretted it.
It seems as if parallels optimises its code for the current release of each OS, and that gives it problems when Ubuntu or Fedora make an update, resulting in kernel panics of the guest OS, and in general a really bad experience. At the time of this writing, you can't use Ubuntu 12.10 because of a bug, and Gnome 3 in any platform will result in screen flickering which tends to become very annoying.
Fusion, on the other hand may not have the same performance as Parallels, but it is and always was more stable than any other version of Parallels.
So, Fusion 5, all the way. Been using it with Linux distros and didn't have any problems yet.
It seems as if parallels optimises its code for the current release of each OS, and that gives it problems when Ubuntu or Fedora make an update, resulting in kernel panics of the guest OS, and in general a really bad experience. At the time of this writing, you can't use Ubuntu 12.10 because of a bug, and Gnome 3 in any platform will result in screen flickering which tends to become very annoying.
Fusion, on the other hand may not have the same performance as Parallels, but it is and always was more stable than any other version of Parallels.
So, Fusion 5, all the way. Been using it with Linux distros and didn't have any problems yet.
My (bad) experience using Parallels
I write this as a costumer of Parallels and vmware fusion.
Im a switcher between PC and Mac and, now, between Parallels and Vmware Fusion. I have used both and I tell you my experience and opinions.
My advice, Don´t buy Parallels, I did it and waste my money
Why?
1- Its expensive
2- Its not better than fusion
3- They dont respect customers
Let´s see:
1- Parallels is Expensive: Why paying almost $80 instead of $50 ? In addition, paying $80 you can install Parallels in 1 Mac. Paying $50 you can install Fusion in 3 Macs.
2- Vmware fusion is better: I used Parallels 7 and, now Fusion 5. The second is faster and better running Office apps, GIS and Corel Draw. I havent found differences playing 3D games. You can say the newest version is Parallels 8. Well, read comparisons from October 2012 MacWorld and MacFormat and youll discover that Fusion 5 y also faster, better and cheaper than Parallels 8
3- Parallels dont respect customers: I bought Parallels 7 on July 18 for my brand new Macbook pro with Retina Display. It never worked, I contact the customer support several times and they told me to buy parallels 8 (I would be eligible for free update if I would bought it on July 25) and pay 49 dollars. I told them that nobody told me P7 wasnt good for my Mac and asked them for free upgrade they offered me a 10% discount! A lack of respect.
In summary: I paid $79,99 on July 18, P7 never worked on my MBPRD (because it wasnt optimized neither for retina display nor Mountain Lion) then I had to pay $49,99 to make it work a nonsense!!! Ahh, off course, subtracting a 10% discount
Then I decided to pay $49,99 to Fusion and discover it is a much better soft. And I can install it on 3 Macs!!
I waste $80 on Parallels dont do that!!!
I write this as a costumer of Parallels and vmware fusion.
Im a switcher between PC and Mac and, now, between Parallels and Vmware Fusion. I have used both and I tell you my experience and opinions.
My advice, Don´t buy Parallels, I did it and waste my money
Why?
1- Its expensive
2- Its not better than fusion
3- They dont respect customers
Let´s see:
1- Parallels is Expensive: Why paying almost $80 instead of $50 ? In addition, paying $80 you can install Parallels in 1 Mac. Paying $50 you can install Fusion in 3 Macs.
2- Vmware fusion is better: I used Parallels 7 and, now Fusion 5. The second is faster and better running Office apps, GIS and Corel Draw. I havent found differences playing 3D games. You can say the newest version is Parallels 8. Well, read comparisons from October 2012 MacWorld and MacFormat and youll discover that Fusion 5 y also faster, better and cheaper than Parallels 8
3- Parallels dont respect customers: I bought Parallels 7 on July 18 for my brand new Macbook pro with Retina Display. It never worked, I contact the customer support several times and they told me to buy parallels 8 (I would be eligible for free update if I would bought it on July 25) and pay 49 dollars. I told them that nobody told me P7 wasnt good for my Mac and asked them for free upgrade they offered me a 10% discount! A lack of respect.
In summary: I paid $79,99 on July 18, P7 never worked on my MBPRD (because it wasnt optimized neither for retina display nor Mountain Lion) then I had to pay $49,99 to make it work a nonsense!!! Ahh, off course, subtracting a 10% discount
Then I decided to pay $49,99 to Fusion and discover it is a much better soft. And I can install it on 3 Macs!!
I waste $80 on Parallels dont do that!!!
Parallels 8 or VMWare Fusion
Looking to run a virtual Windows 7 on iMac (not Bootcamp). Which is best currently installing Parallels 8 trail which most people talk about here. What puts me of is the price of full version!!
Looking to run a virtual Windows 7 on iMac (not Bootcamp). Which is best currently installing Parallels 8 trail which most people talk about here. What puts me of is the price of full version!!
I use Fusion, and I bought a license for a home system when I got an email from VMWare informing me that I could buy a license for $49.
Fusion
I been using Fusion since v2. I tried Parallels but it was not straightforward, too much messing about, can't remember the details but not satisfactory experience. Fusion has never let me down. Latest Fusion 5 is very, very fast to open a VM especially resuming. Drivers are continually updated and I can run 3D games in there exactly as if on native code, or bootcamp if you want me to say that for you to understand properly.
It's really flexible and steady and has never crashed or messed up a VM. You can change the presentation on the fly - 1 window, full screen, conjunctive or whatever they call it where the VM blends in with Mac OS and your Win apps appear in the Dock etc. I have not a problem with it, it's a great soft. Other thing is I was on a hack with a Core 2 Duo processor then an i5 one and Parallels refused to even install, whining about lack of some vCore capability of the CPU, what a nonsense. Fusion installed and ran perfectly every time, never a problem. In my humble opinion Parallels is last in this race. I've seen reviews where they placed P8 & F5 neck n neck on functionality for latest ML-compatible releases but 4 me, like I said, don't even bother wasting valuable time with P when Fusion is sitting there waiting 4 U. vmWare also have far greater o/all experience with virtualization and enterprise installation and support, which also gives a whole lot of weight to their tender. OK, they got my vote. Thanks for listening, have a nice day.
I been using Fusion since v2. I tried Parallels but it was not straightforward, too much messing about, can't remember the details but not satisfactory experience. Fusion has never let me down. Latest Fusion 5 is very, very fast to open a VM especially resuming. Drivers are continually updated and I can run 3D games in there exactly as if on native code, or bootcamp if you want me to say that for you to understand properly.
It's really flexible and steady and has never crashed or messed up a VM. You can change the presentation on the fly - 1 window, full screen, conjunctive or whatever they call it where the VM blends in with Mac OS and your Win apps appear in the Dock etc. I have not a problem with it, it's a great soft. Other thing is I was on a hack with a Core 2 Duo processor then an i5 one and Parallels refused to even install, whining about lack of some vCore capability of the CPU, what a nonsense. Fusion installed and ran perfectly every time, never a problem. In my humble opinion Parallels is last in this race. I've seen reviews where they placed P8 & F5 neck n neck on functionality for latest ML-compatible releases but 4 me, like I said, don't even bother wasting valuable time with P when Fusion is sitting there waiting 4 U. vmWare also have far greater o/all experience with virtualization and enterprise installation and support, which also gives a whole lot of weight to their tender. OK, they got my vote. Thanks for listening, have a nice day.
Last edited:
For me at the moment parallels is the only option - I need directx 10+ for development work.. Doesn't have to be fast, just exist. Fusion doesn't do that.
Having used both in the past I don't think there's much between them speed wise. Or even VirtualBox, which is fine and being free you lose nothing by trying it.
Having used both in the past I don't think there's much between them speed wise. Or even VirtualBox, which is fine and being free you lose nothing by trying it.
I just bought Parallels 8, but where do I buy Windows 8 from and how? All I see is upgrade prices
I bought the full OEM version from B&H. According to the license it's legal for use on personal computers that don't have windows already installed, for use in a partition (i.e. bootcamp) or virtual machine (i.e. parallels). I bought the basic version, not the pro version, but its out of stock right now.
Having always gone the Bootcamp route, this year has been my first foray into virtualization. I chose Parallels Desktop after briefly running trials of both as they seemed about the same. I won't be too keen on a full price upgrade next year -- it would be a strong motivator to jump to Fusion.
Just my two cents here. I own both Fusion 5 and Parallels 8. I use Fusion 5 daily at work and Parallels at home, but not that often.
As for speed, I feel like Parallels 8 is a bit faster, not tremendously faster, but just a touch faster. For cross compatibility, no question, Fusion 5. You can use your Fusion images on PC or Linux without a problem, just copy the file over (this is the #1 reason we use Fusion at work, cross platform support). BUT with Fusion 5 there are a LOT more bugs than with Parallels 8. In the past I would say it's reversed, but for this generation I give the nod to Parallels in terms of stability, and speed.
Most annoying feature of Fusion5. Is it ALWAYS displays your last machine you had opened. I have about 10 to 20 different virtual machines. With Fusion 4 you could double click on the icon and it would open that machine. Now it does that, but also displays (not opens) the one before it. I feel like I'm always closing old machines, it's really annoying.
As for speed, I feel like Parallels 8 is a bit faster, not tremendously faster, but just a touch faster. For cross compatibility, no question, Fusion 5. You can use your Fusion images on PC or Linux without a problem, just copy the file over (this is the #1 reason we use Fusion at work, cross platform support). BUT with Fusion 5 there are a LOT more bugs than with Parallels 8. In the past I would say it's reversed, but for this generation I give the nod to Parallels in terms of stability, and speed.
Most annoying feature of Fusion5. Is it ALWAYS displays your last machine you had opened. I have about 10 to 20 different virtual machines. With Fusion 4 you could double click on the icon and it would open that machine. Now it does that, but also displays (not opens) the one before it. I feel like I'm always closing old machines, it's really annoying.
I have to say I was really pleased with Parallels support. I chatted, asked them to call me because their skype connection was bad. They did and the problem was solved 5 minutes later. I also got some free config advice about bootcamp order setup from them (make your BC first if you want to use it on parallels vs. creating a VM first)
There are some specific differences between the two, but for basic virtualization you can't go wrong with either.
And they both have negatives when it comes to upgrading.
VMWare used to be very generous to its userbase. Upgrading from version 1 to 2 was free; the pricing from version 2 to 3 was pretty cheap. And while Parallels was releasing paid upgrades seemingly every year, VMWare's paid upgrade development cycle was a bit longer. You would still get timely maintenance updates (free). It seemed like the better deal. Then VMWare announced version 4, and the upgrade pricing was the same as the introductory pricing, which was close to double what the previous upgrade pricing had been. A lot of the users were pretty upset, feeling that they weren't being valued. VMWare had also announced a more aggressive upgrade schedule. It wasn't really any cheaper to stick with them over Parallels.
I ended up getting Parallels through a software bundle deal, and my version of VMWare Fusion was incompatible with OS X 10.8 anyway. So now I'm on Parallels 7. I like VMWare better as a company (I was using Parallels before VMWare Fusion), but I'm just going for the best "bang for my buck." If VMWare offers a really compelling feature set, I might change back. Otherwise, whenever Parallels 7 becomes incompatible with OS X or with an OS that I try to virtualize, I'll check feature sets and see what the cost is.
And they both have negatives when it comes to upgrading.
VMWare used to be very generous to its userbase. Upgrading from version 1 to 2 was free; the pricing from version 2 to 3 was pretty cheap. And while Parallels was releasing paid upgrades seemingly every year, VMWare's paid upgrade development cycle was a bit longer. You would still get timely maintenance updates (free). It seemed like the better deal. Then VMWare announced version 4, and the upgrade pricing was the same as the introductory pricing, which was close to double what the previous upgrade pricing had been. A lot of the users were pretty upset, feeling that they weren't being valued. VMWare had also announced a more aggressive upgrade schedule. It wasn't really any cheaper to stick with them over Parallels.
I ended up getting Parallels through a software bundle deal, and my version of VMWare Fusion was incompatible with OS X 10.8 anyway. So now I'm on Parallels 7. I like VMWare better as a company (I was using Parallels before VMWare Fusion), but I'm just going for the best "bang for my buck." If VMWare offers a really compelling feature set, I might change back. Otherwise, whenever Parallels 7 becomes incompatible with OS X or with an OS that I try to virtualize, I'll check feature sets and see what the cost is.
VirtualBox from Oracle
I don't know why it always gets left out of theses discussions, but give VirtualBox a try, before spending money on either one of these.
The price is right (zero). Thats difficult to ignore, unless you have a specific need for one of the other two.
I don't know why it always gets left out of theses discussions, but give VirtualBox a try, before spending money on either one of these.
The price is right (zero). Thats difficult to ignore, unless you have a specific need for one of the other two.
Me too. Parallels runs seemlessly and integrates windows 7 well, near flawlessly
VirtualBox is an excellent product, especially since it's free. The downfall is performance and stability. I've been a VMware Fusion user since day one and it is noticeably faster.
Never been a Parallels fan.
That's not a Fusion problem, that's a general OS X app "problem". They'll simply show the windows from last time. If you open a file from Finder than it'll be opened alongside. I've seen this ever since Fusion 1 beta.
With the library in both Fusion, Parallels and Virtualbox I see no reason why to open vm's you use frequently via the Finder. Just import them in the app and use its library manager to start/stop/suspend the virtual machines.
It is cheaper if you have more than 1 Mac. VMware gives you the right to use it on more than 1 Mac whereas Parallels does not. In case of Parallels you have to buy a license for every Mac you want to install it on. Parallels has a far more aggressive upgrade schedule: if you upgrade OS X, you have to upgrade Parallels to make it work again. VMware Fusion 4.1.3 still works on Mountain Lion like Fusion 3.1.3 worked fine on Lion.
Also, Parallels upgrade prices have always been higher than VMware Fusions.
The reason why some people were frustrated was because of the change in pricing. VMware used to have a price for new users and one for upgraders but they got rid of that and introduced 1 price (well, not really because if you upgrade from Fusion 4 to 5 you upgrade to Fusion 5 Pro which has a bit more features than Fusion 5). If you look closely you'll see that what VMware did was mimic the Mac App Store pricing model with the exception of free upgrading. The most interesting part was the introduction of the Pro version. The current one does not offer that much more over the normal version but it makes one curious about the future. I'm hoping they'll turn it into a Workstation for Mac version.
In terms of buying the software Parallels has the edge because of this: Fusion has only been bundled in a software bundle once but Parallels has been in one many many many times. Another good place to check for discounts is Amazon. Also switching between the two can be attractive as well with both VMware and Parallels giving discounts to upgraders from the "other side".
The overall quality of that product doesn't come near what VMware and Parallels offer. Especially simple things like usb support and I/O seems to be hard for VirtualBox although it is slowly improving. I don't think it is left out because there will be several users who'll mention it. The other two have trial versions so you can test all 3 for free and decide which one to settle for.
Not true: Parallels 6 worked with Snow Leopard and then Lion.
Parallels 7 worked with Lion and its last update worked with Mountain Lion.
Of course updates, such as Parallels 8, give additional functionality: for example, 8 adds the Cut & Paste function to Snow Leopard within Parallels 8.
I've used Fusion 2 and 3 for years; never did they open the previous VM (or display them). I didn't use 4, skipped it and went to 5 that now always opens the previous VM (but doesn't start it running).
We move around VM's so much that going through their built in finder is annoying since I end up having dozens of machines cluttering up their manager because they often don't exist anymore. Removing them through their finder is easy to accidentally delete it. Plus it's not a two step process; opening the library manager, then finding and launching the VM. Instead just double click the VM and away you go.
