Apple Retail Stores to Encourage Mac Business Usage with Parallels Desktop, Parallels 9 Pre-Orders Begin Popping Up

[bushido]

Any time I see a Mac running Widows, the world becomes a darker place.

my boss got an macbook pro retina just to throw windows XP on it and an iPad simply to display an calendar 24/7 next to his desk. its breaking my heart a little

It seems to me that the IT Manager comments in this thread reflect an old school mentality: you get issued a work laptop, use it how work tells you to, let IT manage updates, and receive Office 2007 a few months *after* Office 2010 came out at retail because it "needed testing."

BYOD programs work because it gives the user the ability to use what they're most comfortable with. I've unofficially been using BYOD since 2010 (when I figured out how to set up work email on Mac Mail). I've been more productive because I operate in the environment I picked out -- not IT. My new company is 100% BYOD. We update our machines on our own, buy our own software, pick our own smartphones -- and you won't find a more productive team than ours.

i wish that was the case at my company. im an intern at a big world wide company and we still run windows xp (finally updating to windows 7 next month .. yay) on some ****** as fujitsu siemens computers / laptops. the displays arent even 16:9 yet and do not get me started on that display resolution and it takes like 12 minutes to boot thanks to all the security and server stuff and we are also forced to use internet explorer 8 and photoshop cs3. its very frustrating.

i am willing to bet that i would be 100% more productive using my own set up like u

 

[skasol]

I too use VMware and love it. No issues with crashing.

 

[Smartass]

Yes, throw away all windows CDs and start using OSx on every computer in the office. Doesnt matter how much people will actually know how to use it as effective as they do for windows. The only thing thats important is that it looks great.

 

[macnisse]

Using parallels for xp, 7, ubuntu = works fine.

 

[theheadguy]

So the IT people don't have total control of how we should use our laptop.

I'm confused as to how having a Mac prevents them from having "total control".

 

[coolspot18]

Apple should just include a VM with OSX.

I'm confused as to how having a Mac prevents them from having "total control".

OSX does not have client management capabilities with its Active Directory support, therefore, IT people cannot implement client side security polices on the mac.

----------

BYOD programs work because it gives the user the ability to use what they're most comfortable with. I've unofficially been using BYOD since 2010 (when I figured out how to set up work email on Mac Mail). I've been more productive because I operate in the environment I picked out -- not IT. My new company is 100% BYOD. We update our machines on our own, buy our own software, pick our own smartphones -- and you won't find a more productive team than ours.

How is your data secured? What happens when someone loses a laptop or decides to install malware?

----------

i wish that was the case at my company. im an intern at a big world wide company and we still run windows xp (finally updating to windows 7 next month .. yay) on some ****** as fujitsu siemens computers / laptops. the displays arent even 16:9 yet and do not get me started on that display resolution and it takes like 12 minutes to boot thanks to all the security and server stuff and we are also forced to use internet explorer 8 and photoshop cs3. its very frustrating.

i am willing to bet that i would be 100% more productive using my own set up like u

Yes, you'll probably be 100% more productive, but also 100% less secure. Gave and take.

----------

A few months back I was trying to pick between Parallels and VMWare. Apple Retail employee I spoke with said they were using VMWare to run Windows only software from the cell phone companies in the back... This was a surprise considering Parallels was on the wall to purchase and VMWare was not...

I bet VMWare has a much stronger account management team than Parallels. VMWare knows how to deal with Enterprises very well and therefore landed the back-office contracts with Apple.

 

[iMerik]

My guess is that they want to convince Windows-only shops to give Macs a try while still being able to support their Windows applications with the hope that people will slowly migrate over to Mac-only environments. When I first switched from Windows to Mac, I ran a lot in Parallels. Now I run one application maybe twice a month. It made the move for a newbie a lot less painful and actually convinced me to make the move in the first place.

 

[0029937]

We used VMWare until v5 when Parallels started kicking its butt up and down every feature list and performance test.

VMWare makes some great products, and is a great company, but for running Windows on a Mac, Parallels wins hands down.

The differences may not be a big deal for resource-light programs, but we use Autodesk Inventor, Solidworks, Surfcam and Architectural Desktop, and the performance is drastic.

Win8 was not an upgrade though. Went back to our Win7 images instead. At its best, windows stays out of sight & out of mind, in transparency mode, like an invisible layer that allows our cad programs to run as if they're running in OSX. We restore our windows images from Time Machine over the weekend. Brand new windows installs every monday morning keeps windows working.

MS should come out with half as many Windows OS's as they do. Just skip the even number ones and put the resources into sprucing up the solid odd numbered ones.

Can anyone please confirm this has been their experience as well with Parrallels vs. VMWare. I'll be using AutoCAD plus possibly Revit. I imagine other 3D software would have similiar hardware needs. Really would like to hear from others who have tried both as I'll be getting a Haswell rMBP this Fall and would love to be able to skip Boot Camp.

 

[macs4nw]

.....Apple is aiming to encourage Mac usage to its business consumers by displaying iMacs running a copy of Microsoft's Windows 8 operating system within Parallels Desktop 8 for Mac in the business section of its stores, according to a report from 9to5Mac. Apple Retail Stores will also train business specialists on using Parallels and Windows software as part of the initiative.

Article Link: Apple Retail Stores to Encourage Mac Business Usage with Parallels Desktop, Parallels 9 Pre-Orders Begin Popping Up

Ballmer is smiling; he's got Tim giving him free advertising for his Windows platform, in the Apple Store, no less......lol

.....and what's always ended the discussion is the question, "Why do you want a Mac at work beyond trying to impress people?"

Say what?.....Apple should be flattered, but really.....?
It's just a computer, not a status symbol.

 

[wingsabre]

Numerous reasons. From the IT department's perspective, one of them should be that they don't generally need replacing nearly as often as your average standard-issue Dell laptop. And despite recent scares, OS X still don't succumb to viruses etc. *nearly* as often as Windows.

Other than that, the answer is pretty much the same as "why would you want a Mac at home?": it depends what you want to do with it. In general, they're easier to set up and maintain, they have a longer useful lifespan without doing any significant hardware upgrades, and I'm just more productive with Macs than I am with Windows. And I've been working and tinkering with various Unix machines for 25 years, so having a certified Unix on my laptop is a definite bonus.

That may be the case for consumers, but for business and enterprise, they've ran XP for over 12 years. Go to any supermarket, banks, hospitals, etc... and they're still on XP. Some are in the process of switching to 7, but even so they're not replacing entire computers with it. They're just installing 7 on top of old devices. If they switch to Macs they're likely going to adopt iPads as a way to move towards a portable market. However iPads and Macs in general do have an expiration date for support. As bad as it is for Microsoft, they've enabled prolonged support for their OS, and that's what companies like.

 

[rajid]

Virtualbox - free, works.

I must say, I used to use Parallels, but when they continued demanding over $40 for upgrades every year or so, I started looking for something else. I quickly found "Virtualbox" (free, open source) and have been happy ever since. I have Windows XP, Ubuntu, and Fedora installations under Virtualbox and they work for me quite well, for the small amount of work I need to do there.

I know it won't work for everyone, but it certainly should be your first try, since it's free. If it works, great! If not, then consider Parallels or VMware.

 

[phoenixsan]

I always....

encourage people asking me about Windows running in a Mac, to do it via virtualization. Many people prefer VMWare over Parallels, I know....But we dont know, thinking cynically, if Apple have and agreement with Parallels or something like that going on....

 

[longofest]

I've told them the downsides of virtualization (it's high-maintenance and more prone to crashing than a non-virtualized environment)

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

At work, at any given time I have 3 VMs in addition to my host running. I have Windows XP to run some software that my company still can't get to run on newer OSes well, Windows 7 development machine, and an Ubuntu development machine. The host is Windows 7.

I have not rebooted the host or any of the VMs in a few months. My only issue is I have one IDE in my Windows 7 environment that has a memory leak and I need to restart every couple of days or it makes the memory start thrashing.

Trying to maintain this kind of setup in a non-virtualized environment would be MUCH more high maintenance. Also, having uptime of several months for a desktop machine I think speaks for itself.

Resistance is futile. Virtualization is where the future is. Get with it, or get left behind.

----------

When someone else is paying for the computer, you have to be able to defend the decision to spend a lot more money on a computer that's actually going to be MORE work to set up than a standard PC would be.

Running Windows in a VM on a Mac is definitely more high-maintenance than running Windows on a PC is; for example, I can't install updates on my Mac that require a reboot without first shutting down all of my VMs.

Yet saving a VM state to disk - sometimes referred to as "pausing" the VM, is insanely quick and easy, so I have to wonder why you wouldn't just do that vs shutting down your VMs.

 

[D.T.]

This comment alone mean your blowing smoke out your tailpipe

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

Funny enough, my Win 7 WM (in Parallels) I use for some projects to support .NET development, was actually a "real" Windows install from my HP DV7 that I ported over using migration tools in Parallels ... and it's virtually (pun intended...) crash free after close to 2 years vs. the ~3 times a week major issues I had running it on the HP

Fortunately that's mostly maintenance work, most of the active development I'm involved in is Python, Ruby/Rails, Postgres and Xcode, so I'm generally native (including MS Office Apps and most other productivity and leisure apps )

I keep a snapshot of my VMs stored on a local backup machine and DropBox, so if I have a catastrophic failure, a new machine is just a few minutes away.

 

[clayj]

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

You can throw up all you like. I've already said that VMware on a PC platform (e.g., ESX on an HP server) is very stable, but that I've been experiencing issues with VMware Fusion on my Mac Pro for a long time now, due to issues with Mac OS X itself. I ask Apple for help, and they blame VMware; I ask VMware for help, and they blame Apple. I have had long runs where there have been no issues, but ultimately if I had the option of having a separate PC here at home to run SBS 2011 on, rather than running it in a VM, I would probably go with that option. The problem is that I don't have space for it.

Resistance is futile. Virtualization is where the future is. Get with it, or get left behind.

I know that it is. But Apple need to do a better job of stabilizing their OS if they ever want it to be used as any sort of VM host. VMware's ESX is much, MUCH more suitable.

 

[jonnysods]

Parallels?

Really?

 

[Lazy]

It would make a lot more sense if Apple were using Windows 7 in those VMs, seeing as how the usage rate thereof in businesses is several times that of Windows 8.

Unless... it's really sneaky way to highlight how different Windows 8 is and keep Windows users from going there.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

apple will probably do a better job of selling windows 8 to the enterprise than microsoft has. At least apple couldn't do any worse.

hahahaah!!!! Rofl!!! :d

----------

Some people live in very small worlds.

Well, what I meant is they will have a better luck to succeed with Windows 7. Why bother with Windows 8 crap?

 

[0029937]

Parallels vs VMWare... who has tried both and which one did you like better? Thanks.

Edit: I guess it doesn't really matter at this point seeing as how new versions will be released for Mavericks.

 

[seamer]

They're going to need to make sure it has a good chunk of ram. I had 8gb in my 2013 imac and both OS's ran a little slow on 4gb allocated to each. Changed it up to 16gb, retained 4gb allocated to Win7 and now both OS's fly when they are in use.

 

[Stella]

Parallels vs VMWare... who has tried both and which one did you like better? Thanks.

Edit: I guess it doesn't really matter at this point seeing as how new versions will be released for Mavericks.

I much prefer Parallels ( P.) - on several occasions I have had identical windows 7 VMs - on both applications and running the same software ( non gaming )found that Parallels offered the better performance. Also, P. has better functionality, such as opening Mac applications ( any you want ) in a Windows VM, while VMWare offers several fixed applications, such as Web browser, email, RSS and a few others.

In terms of gaming, P. is far ahead of VMWare. ( I use P. because I don't want to dual boot my Mac ).

Both P and VMWare have been as stable as each other.

If you read other posts you'l find that YMMV is very much true.

 

[donutbagel]

Parallels vs VMWare... who has tried both and which one did you like better? Thanks.

Edit: I guess it doesn't really matter at this point seeing as how new versions will be released for Mavericks.

Parallels.

 

[Zellio]

We used VMWare until v5 when Parallels started kicking its butt up and down every feature list and performance test.

VMWare makes some great products, and is a great company, but for running Windows on a Mac, Parallels wins hands down.

The differences may not be a big deal for resource-light programs, but we use Autodesk Inventor, Solidworks, Surfcam and Architectural Desktop, and the performance is drastic.

Win8 was not an upgrade though. Went back to our Win7 images instead. At its best, windows stays out of sight & out of mind, in transparency mode, like an invisible layer that allows our cad programs to run as if they're running in OSX. We restore our windows images from Time Machine over the weekend. Brand new windows installs every monday morning keeps windows working.

MS should come out with half as many Windows OS's as they do. Just skip the even number ones and put the resources into sprucing up the solid odd numbered ones.

Oh jeez, that picture again.

Okay, lets go over the problems here.

1. Windows doesn't go from 1.0 to 3.1. The picture also ignores NT and various other windows version.
2. Windows 95 wasn't '****'. It had lots of bugs, but it was very advanced for the computer world at the time. You can argue that it was a DOS shell, or argue it versus OS/2, but it still was an excellent OS at it's time.
3. Windows 98 was simply a few years later version of Win95, with support for more ram, newer cpus and usb. It was not '****' nor 'good' until service pack 1.
4. ME is the only one that was ****, and it was actually stable if you installed it fresh.
5. Xp was not that good until Service pack 2, and you can actually get viruses simply by running a pre service pack 2 version on the web.
6. Windows Vista was not ****. It was a hog, but it was stable. The problem was driver support.

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

It seems to me that the IT Manager comments in this thread reflect an old school mentality: you get issued a work laptop, use it how work tells you to, let IT manage updates, and receive Office 2007 a few months *after* Office 2010 came out at retail because it "needed testing."

BYOD programs work because it gives the user the ability to use what they're most comfortable with. I've unofficially been using BYOD since 2010 (when I figured out how to set up work email on Mac Mail). I've been more productive because I operate in the environment I picked out -- not IT. My new company is 100% BYOD. We update our machines on our own, buy our own software, pick our own smartphones -- and you won't find a more productive team than ours.

Couple that with many business data analytics apps moving to web format.

There are only a handful of applications that only run in Windows that I have needed to run a virtual machine.

1 - Quickbooks
2 - 3DS Max
3 - Revit/AutoCAD
4 - SAP Business One
5 - Vizio

 

[Zyphras]

Same here. I once couldn't empty my Recycle Bin because I did not have enough disk space. "Try deleting files to free up space." It never worked with flash drives, always wanted to install drivers for stuff like mice, and had that retarded security hole where you could get in as an admin with no credentials by bringing up the help, printing it, selecting a custom border image, and opening the C drive from the file browser.

Oh gawd, I just died from laughter. I remember a lot of that of that.

Maybe the movie called The Wrestler was right when Mickey Rourke said "man, the nineties really sucked". It was like the 80s (which sucked most) but with only slightly better colo(u)r depth and screen resolution.