Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Yes, I know that. And I do have Microsoft Office 2011 for Mac. But I don't know if it's just me, but I feel that Office 2011 is not on par with Office 2010 for Windows. It feels like an inferior product.

You're spot on. Office for Mac has always been, and continues to be, a laborious product. It doesn't work well, crashes frequently, and is missing features and workflow fixes.
 
Can't think of a single reason you'd want to run any of those apps via. Parallels instead of the OS X native versions...

Office for Mac... Not as good. Vegas for Mac? Does it exist? Now LR and CS6 I might go native... Not sure
 
office 2010 for windows is way better than office for mac! i use it a lot and i must use the combo parallels+office 2010, it works great!

I have Parallels Desktop running Windows XP on my MacBook. I just can't run Windows 7 because it is so slow under Parallels! Windows XP at least runs at an acceptable speed (but not fast).

On which computer do you use Parallels? And which version of Windows and Office do you use?

I suspect that Parallels would run much faster on a MacBook Pro with an SSD drive instrad of HDD, wouldn't it? To run too operating systems at the sime time (Mac OS and Windows) is too much for a 5400 RPM HD, but I guess an SSD would take it much better. And the processor speed of a MacBook Pro would make it faster than an Air. That's one of the main reasons I want an SSD instead of a HDD on the redesigned MacBook Pro. Anybody had a similar experience with Parallels/VMWare Fusion on a MacBook Pro/Air with SSD?
 
I don't have a Mac yet... So I go off what I hear ppl say about parallels and speed. Not really worried about office speed so much, little concerned about Sony Vegas pro speed, however I plan to run 16GB ram.
 
I have Parallels Desktop running Windows XP on my MacBook. I just can't run Windows 7 because it is so slow under Parallels! Windows XP at least runs at an acceptable speed (but not fast).

On which computer do you use Parallels? And which version of Windows and Office do you use?

I suspect that Parallels would run much faster on a MacBook Pro with an SSD drive instrad of HDD, wouldn't it? To run too operating systems at the sime time (Mac OS and Windows) is too much for a 5400 RPM HD, but I guess an SSD would take it much better. And the processor speed of a MacBook Pro would make it faster than an Air. That's one of the main reasons I want an SSD instead of a HDD on the redesigned MacBook Pro. Anybody had a similar experience with Parallels/VMWare Fusion on a MacBook Pro/Air with SSD?

i was running it on the last i7 17" mbp but without ssd. (i said "was" because i have sold it and i am waiting for the new one ).

You run it slow mainly for one reason: only 2gb of ram, upgrade your ram to 4 or 8 gb and you will see a great improvement, expecially with applications like parallels.

Obviously it would run (expecially start) faster on an ssd, but with only 2gb of ram you would see a much better improvement upgrading the ram. i am sure of it because my brother is running parallels+xp+office 2010 on a 2009 mbp with 4gb of ram. to be sure install a widget like "istat pro" (it is free) and you will see how much ram you are using.

ah, i was using paralles 7 with windows xp and office 2010... i used to edit documents that were in the mac os dropbox folder.
 
Maybe it is all AG from here on. Doubtful but not impossible. With a decent AR film they could find some good middle ground.
 
I once went the Hackintosh route... man it was a nightmare. My PC and its components were, on paper, 100% compatible with OSX, but once everything was up and running, there was ALWAYS a little something that wouldn't work: the laptop wouldnt wake up from sleep, or the webcam would record video but not audio, or the audio volume would get stuck at 100% volume, etc. Every time I managed to patch something to work, something else would break.

I spent a dozens of hours on that hackintosh laptop, trying to make it work flawlessly, and never succeeded. Not worth it.

Yeah, me too. I've managed to get OSX86 working in several different flavors of virtual machines and on a couple of different laptops, and it's like pulling teeth every time. I think if you're lucky enough to be using a laptop that's EXACTLY the same model and revision (same chips, same ACPI tables, etc) as what one of the OSX86 developers is using, it could in theory go smoothly. But I've never seen this happen. I've always struggled with it.

It's not just the pain of setting up a hackintosh that I was talking about, though. I've been using a ThinkPad for the last couple of months. There are some nice things about it, and it's a lot less expensive than a MBP (although quite a bit more expensive than the PC laptop average - it's a T-series laptop). But while the ergonomics are a lot better than the Dells that I've used in the past, it's a lot worse than the 15" MBP I sold recently.

The trackpad, for example, sucks compared to the one on my old MBP. It's sooo much better than the trackpads on any other PC laptop I've owned, but it's still a few cuts below what Apple puts on the MBP.

You really do get what you pay for.

----------

Im typing this on a Hackintosh right now. I don't recommend buying a laptop and hackintoshing it however a PC is a completely different ball game. The main things are the Mobo, GPU and to an extent, processor (as in limited choice, only Intel etc) Once you have the above in order it should be smooth sailing provided you have done your research properly.

Do your research, keep backups and you should be fine. I couldn't be more happy with my 3 screen Hackintosh, coupled with my MacBook Air for when I'm out and about, it's the perfect combination.

:apple:

Yeah, building a super-powerful desktop hackintosh and buying an Apple MBA or MBP seems to be really popular - it's what a couple of my friends have done. Apple just doesn't leave you many options on the desktop, but their laptops are peerless.
 
Yeah, me too. I've managed to get OSX86 working in several different flavors of virtual machines and on a couple of different laptops, and it's like pulling teeth every time. I think if you're lucky enough to be using a laptop that's EXACTLY the same model and revision (same chips, same ACPI tables, etc) as what one of the OSX86 developers is using, it could in theory go smoothly. But I've never seen this happen. I've always struggled with it.

It's not just the pain of setting up a hackintosh that I was talking about, though. I've been using a ThinkPad for the last couple of months. There are some nice things about it, and it's a lot less expensive than a MBP (although quite a bit more expensive than the PC laptop average - it's a T-series laptop). But while the ergonomics are a lot better than the Dells that I've used in the past, it's a lot worse than the 15" MBP I sold recently.

The trackpad, for example, sucks compared to the one on my old MBP. It's sooo much better than the trackpads on any other PC laptop I've owned, but it's still a few cuts below what Apple puts on the MBP.

You really do get what you pay for.

i am running the backup of my i7 17 mbp on a i5 2500k @4.5 ghz, 8gb ram, asus p8p67 evo hackintosh.
it works faster than the i7 quad core macbook pro (around 13k on geekbench) and i have just some minor problems (like one kernel panic every 48h of use).

well i still prefer the macbook pro just because i am sure that nothing could go wrong, the hackintosh is hard to fresy install the OS, i have to read carefully what does every system update before updating etc....

But since i don't have the mbp anymore (waiting for the new one), i have no options and i must say that the machine is working very well
 
3 more weeks!

I only have 8 Gb's left of room on my 2009 MBP, so I'm ready for 3 weeks from today. I wouldn't mind SSD but I need at least 500GB so yeah that's not going to happen. My MBP has a 350Gb hard drive in it and I replaced it with a 500GB hard drive at Fry's and it overheated my whole laptop, almost $400 to fix it, so for the newbies out there I just wouldn't do that at all. Also I'm selling this MBP in 3 weeks so look for me on Dallas Craig's List.
 
I only have 8 Gb's left of room on my 2009 MBP, so I'm ready for 3 weeks from today. I wouldn't mind SSD but I need at least 500GB so yeah that's not going to happen. My MBP has a 350Gb hard drive in it and I replaced it with a 500GB hard drive at Fry's and it overheated my whole laptop, almost $400 to fix it, so for the newbies out there I just wouldn't do that at all. Also I'm selling this MBP in 3 weeks so look for me on Dallas Craig's List.


An HD replacement shouldnt overheat your MBP like that. My bet is either you disconnected a fan or there was another problem with your MBP that developed.

As far as the "want SSD but need lots of space" problem if you dont need the SSD for everything go the optibay route - a smaller SSD for apps, OS, settings + bigger HD in a diff bay for bulk storage
 
A friend of mine who works at an Apple store told me that the new pros would BE awesome!

The retina display is gorgeous and its new chassis is very solid!

Also, the 13 inch is coming with nvidia gt 650m, while the 15 with gt 670m, with 2 and 3 gb vram.

The battery time has increased with the ssds, staying on on average usage for about 10 hours.

Can't wait!
 
A friend of mine who works at an Apple store told me that the new pros would BE awesome!

The retina display is gorgeous and its new chassis is very solid!

Also, the 13 inch is coming with nvidia gt 650m, while the 15 with gt 670m, with 2 and 3 gb vram.

The battery time has increased with the ssds, staying on on average usage for about 10 hours.

Can't wait!

Your friend that works at the apple store wouldnt know anything more that what has been posted as rumors so far.
 
A friend of mine who works at an Apple store told me that the new pros would BE awesome!

The retina display is gorgeous and its new chassis is very solid!

Also, the 13 inch is coming with nvidia gt 650m, while the 15 with gt 670m, with 2 and 3 gb vram.

The battery time has increased with the ssds, staying on on average usage for about 10 hours.

Can't wait!

Looks/sounds like your friend is reading this (or other Apple related board) :p They don't know ****** working at Apple store, NADA.
 
Actually it is very possible that his friend knows what's going on if he is a stock/shipping manger. I'm sure they get advance notice of when and what shipments are coming to the store. I work in retail and it would be an inventory disaster if you only got a day or two notice of a massive shipment coming in.
 
Kinda hard to believe the above but seems pretty specific to be made up. Either has a good source or a good imagination with too much time on his hands.
 
Actually it is very possible that his friend knows what's going on if he is a stock/shipping manger. I'm sure they get advance notice of when and what shipments are coming to the store. I work in retail and it would be an inventory disaster if you only got a day or two notice of a massive shipment coming in.

Apart from it's a known FACT that Apple will NOT tell ANYONE what is in the new machines, what they look like, options etc until the day before or even the day of release for any new product.
 
Actually it is very possible that his friend knows what's going on if he is a stock/shipping manger. I'm sure they get advance notice of when and what shipments are coming to the store. I work in retail and it would be an inventory disaster if you only got a day or two notice of a massive shipment coming in.

I've heard that Apple stores mostly operate like car dealerships - the shipment is put together at headquarters and the dealer knows nothing about what's coming. Their store inventory is mostly managed remotely and they don't really know what they're getting until they open the shipping palettes. Apple coordinates with their shippers so that the shipments arrive just in time (like within 48 hours) of the new product launch.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.