Windows 7 installed. Add Fusion or Parallels?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by Communicator, Jul 19, 2013.

  1. macrumors newbie

    Mar 12, 2013
    I have a MacBook Pro Retina 15" with the SSD partitioned (via Bootcamp) with Windows 7 and Mac OSX Mountain Lion.

    Both work perfectly.

    To save the need for reboots, is it possible, and an easy process, to install VMWare or Parallels without the need to re-install Windows 7 or change the partitions.

    Can someone with the experience give me an idea of what the process entails, if it is indeed possible.

    Given that my set up at present works perfectly well, except for the need for reboots for OSX to Windows, I would use VMWare or Parallels only if there was little risk of causing trouble with the new installation.

    Thanks for any help.

  2. macrumors P6


    Mar 20, 2004
    "Between the Hedges"
    Yes, both Fusion and Parallels allow you to run your Boot Camp partition and process is fairly simple and straight forward to connect
  3. macrumors 6502a

    Jul 22, 2010
    Short answer - no. You'll have to install Win7 as a virtual machine under either Fusion or Parallels
  4. macrumors 6502a

    Mar 1, 2011
    East Coast
    I've never understood why anyone uses Bootcamp to get Windows up and running when there are software alternatives that allow that without requiring a reboot.

    I've run VMWARE Fusion for years without incident.
  5. macrumors regular

    Jun 29, 2013
    VMWare is really nice, it hardly taxes the CPU on my 8gb RAM MBA, and I get around 9 hours of battery :) However, I have read some reviews saying that Parallels is better for gaming,
  6. macrumors 68020

    Sep 6, 2002
  7. macrumors 6502a

    Jul 22, 2010
  8. macrumors 6502a

    Feb 7, 2011
    I use parallels desktop 8, have used both (shortly used fusion) parallels is MUCH better. faster nicer etc. go for that.
  9. macrumors member


    Jan 3, 2013
    Fun fact: Parallels is faster than fusion because parallels doesn't have to simulate the computer processor, unlike fusion.

  10. Moderator


    Staff Member

    May 3, 2009
    Yet Fusion typically is a bit more stable and has superior tech support. Plus no ads as you start the product up.

    Bottom line, its a personal preference, I like Fusion because of the stability, I ran into kernel panics on OSX and BSODs from time to time with Parallels (a couple of versions ago). When I reach out to Fusions tech support I usually get a response within the day.

    Parallels is very popular because its usually faster and they typically add new features quicker then VMware does.
  11. macrumors regular

    Apr 19, 2010
    This is false.

    Both VMware Fusion and Parallels use hardware virtualization.

    I think both are capable of virtualizing Intel-on-Intel without virtualization instructions (or they were in the past).

    Even VirtualBox, the mostly free, mostly open-source offering from Oracle, uses virtualization in hardware.

    You may be thinking of an emulator, e.g., QEMU or PearPC from the old PowerPC days.
  12. macrumors 68020


    Oct 25, 2008
    For the few apps I need on Win, I use a virtual and find both Parallels and Fusion quite capable. Gamers are far better off to do the boot deal rather than go virtual. I say this based on several friends that do some regular gaming and all seem to say the same thing that virtual is not the way to go for games.

    Just more peanuts from the gallery.
  13. takeshi74, Jul 19, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2013

    macrumors 601

    Feb 9, 2011
    ...and yes, it's very easy. I've done so with both. Just make sure that you're set up to run your Boot Camp partition under whichever solution you choose versus importing. Importing will create a VM copy. I unintentionally did that and didn't realize until I noticed that there was some divergence between Boot Camp and Fusion.

    Overhead. Don't assume your preferences and priorities to be universal no matter what the topic. This is covered in every thread that discusses Boot Camp versus Fusion & Parallels. If one sets up Boot Camp first and then uses Fusion or Parallels to run the Boot Camp partition then one has the option of using either solution as needed. For resource intensive gaming I Boot Camp. For less demanding usage I use Fusion.

    I ran Parallels for years without incident. One data point is never a trend.

    Better is always highly subjective no matter what the topic. There are pros and cons to each solution -- just like anything else. Ads with Parallels made it a non-starter for me. YMMV as with any subjective matter.

    Yup, you don't get something for nothing. Virtual solutions will have overhead associated with them. Additionally, resources are split between the host and guest OS's.
  14. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Mar 12, 2013
    Thanks to everyone who replied for the information and good advice.

    I'll probably leave well alone and run OSX and Windows 7 separately, as I have them currently set up on my MacBook.

  15. macrumors 68030


    Nov 23, 2011
    I'm afraid I'll have to disagree based on my experiences. If you run Windows virtually in OS X using Parallels, and you go to the system information, it will show the exact CPU model that the Mac has. The CPU is in no way emulated, Parallels uses it directly. Add more processors/threads to the VM and it will still show as being the same model, but more processors show up in Task Manager.

    Every time I've used VMs on VMware it seems to just come up as 'unknown processor @3.2GHz' or something like that.

    But if it's different in the newer versions of VMware then I stand corrected. :)
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Mar 1, 2011
    East Coast
  17. macrumors 68030


    Nov 23, 2011
    I stand corrected, thanks for the clarification. :eek:

Share This Page