Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Boxless Windows Virtualization?

d4m1r

d4m1r

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 1, 2011
199
0
Bosnia
Hey guys, I am looking to install Windows 7 on my MBP but I need it to do something specific....I want to be able to put Windows applications on my dock and run them so they look native to OS X. I mean they don't run within a virtualized box (like from a Windows desktop) but when launched, load up like they would on Windows. They would still be running within a virtualized layer underneath of course, but it would not be visible. And I would be able to close individual applications, make it full screen, etc.

Can VMware Fusion, Parrallels, or even Virtualbox do this? Let me know if you guys need more information.
 
VMWare Fusion also does this, in their package it is called Unity. I think most VM host apps offer this type of system now.
 
Right, seemless is probably the better way to describe it....Thanks for the replies guys, look like I'll be installing Windows 7 via bootcamp and then installing Parallels as it seems to have better performance reviews than VMware Fusion.

Now, what about stability? For those that have a similar "seemless" setup, is it any more prone to crashes than running it within a virtualized box/window?
 
Stability is pretty good in that mode, although if you are running it on the machine you have listed in your sig then I would be cautious because that mode seems to like using more RAM than the normal windowed mode. If anything I'd upgrade your system to max RAM to help boost VM performance, since it's cheap these days.
 
A RAM upgrade is coming in the near future (probably gskill or crucial) and thanks for the reply guys!

Think I'm gonna go with Parallels 7 or 8 over VMware Fusion....
 
Using VMWare in this very way (Unity).

My MSAccess icon sits on the doc right beside my Mac apps (along with a handful of other Windows-only apps). Truly seamless.

My limited testing, for my specific needs (large DB manipulations), indicated VMWare a better choice. Performance is quite comparable to bootcamp-only tests I ran.

Good luck!
 
d4m1r said:
Think I'm gonna go with Parallels 7 or 8 over VMware Fusion....
Click to expand...
I haven't really tested performance between the two but the popup ads at startup with Parallels were a dealbreaker for me and I switched to Fusion.
 
Having used Parallels 7 until recently and now using Fusion 5, I'd have to say that they're both pretty similar. I'm still getting used to Fusion, but off the bat I'd give Coherence the slight edge over Unity in terms of seamless integration with OSX. I am finding that Fusion is slightly more stable. Performance seems about the same, but I'm running Fusion on a 16GB system whereas I only ran Parallels with 4GB.

I am glad to be rid of the Parallels post-purchase pop-up advertisements, though I might miss the chance to craft such alliterative phrases.
 
takeshi74 said:
I haven't really tested performance between the two but the popup ads at startup with Parallels were a dealbreaker for me and I switched to Fusion.
Click to expand...

If I had bought Parellels and they put ads in it, I'd be furious. Guess I'll never try their software.
 
not to diss the parallels guys or such, but vmware is doing this virtualization stuff from day 1... remember using their products to run windows 2000 inside linux 2.4 ages ago.

that's where my money goes. so far trouble-free and I can even just copy the virtual disks to my 'corporate' computer that runs windows if I need to and it works flawlessly (fusion 4 on mac, workstation 8 on windowze). probably not as easy with parallels.

cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back