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

CrossOver vs Parallels vs Fusion

rasmusDoh said:
Also you all talk about that it can get slow if not enough RAM are assigned.. How many do you usually assign to your "Windows virtualization"? I'll have 4 GB total, so what'd you recommend, when i won't be gaming, for XP and Win 7 respectively? :)
Click to expand...

I usually just assign half to the virtual machine, but it depends. It can be changed after the virtual machine has been created, just requiring a restart. If Windows is too slow, give it more memory. If Mac OS X runs too slowly while virtualizing Windows, decrease the memory allotment.

Paperboy2010 said:
From the sounds of it above, you need to buy Windows OS if you're using Bootcamp, but you DON'T if you're using a VM Ware product, or Crossover...is that correct??
Click to expand...

You don't need to buy Windows with CrossOver/WINE. VMware/Parallels/VirtualBox act as completely independent PCs running on your computer, so they do require that you bring your own operating system, be it Windows or Linux.
 
Cool!

Have a few larger programs that i use very rarely (at least ATM). Wouldn't it be a good idea to make a BootCamp partition for those - and then only boot that occational time - and then only run the lighter Windows programs in virtualization?

Can i make a BootCamp partition for the above - and then also have a "virtual pc" image within Fusion? Will that work?
 
Yes. Parallels can even virtualize your Boot Camp partition when you're running Mac OS X so you don't have to reboot to use small apps but can still do so for bigger stuff.
 
rasmusDoh said:
Nice! But can't Fusion do that too?
Click to expand...
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, Fusion has no problem booting from a Boot Camp partition, but while it claims otherwise, when I tried this I needed to re-authenticate Windows every time I switched from a virtual machine to a full Bootcamp boot. Which is essentially useless given MS's ridiculous authentication scheme if it decides you've changed your hardware one too many times.

rasmusDoh said:
Also you all talk about that it can get slow if not enough RAM are assigned.. How many do you usually assign to your "Windows virtualization"? I'll have 4 GB total, so what'd you recommend, when i won't be gaming, for XP and Win 7 respectively? :)
Click to expand...
BlueRevolution's recommendations are good, though I will note that XP should be functional all the way down to 500MB if you're not running anything intensive, and should run fine with 1GB allocated to it for most light-duty work.

Win7 isn't going to be happy with under 1GB, and really I'd give it 2GB unless you really need the extra RAM for the MacOS at the same time.

On my 2GB MBP I have Fusion set to give XP 512MB since all I use it for is IE testing, and RAM is already pretty tight with what I usually have running. On my 8GB iMac, I have parallels giving Vista 2GB and a couple of processor cores.
 
Makosuke said:
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, Fusion has no problem booting from a Boot Camp partition, but while it claims otherwise, when I tried this I needed to re-authenticate Windows every time I switched from a virtual machine to a full Bootcamp boot. Which is essentially useless given MS's ridiculous authentication scheme if it decides you've changed your hardware one too many times.
Click to expand...

Fusion does this just as well as Parallels, both will need to re-authenticate the first time you boot that mode. IE you'll need to authenticate twice, once while in boot camp and once in the application running boot camp.
 
Now that we're talking about RAM and Win XP..

Are there any actual advantages of using Win 7 instead of Win XP for both BootCamp and virtualization?

AFAIK i don't have any programs that are only 64-bit compatible - so XP should be able to run all the programs that Win 7 can.

Also there's still some programs that i don't think are quite optimized for Win 7 (nor Vista). It's mostly somewhat older programs, but it's infact mainly programs like those i'll need to run on Windows. It's for work and i have to use the programs they require me to, so i can't even try to find a Mac alternative.

Anyway i like Win 7 on my current Dell, but i mainly like it over XP because of the more "fancy" design like Aero and Snap. But IMHO those are kinda rip-offs from Mac OS X, so i'll get that or something better in Snow Leopard.

Main point: Win 7 or XP? Don't really need the Win 7 design and less RAM needed for virtualization with XP sounds nice..
 
CylonGlitch said:
Fusion does this just as well as Parallels, both will need to re-authenticate the first time you boot that mode.
Click to expand...
That's the thing; Fusion's documentation says that you only need to re-authenticate once in each environment and then you're good, but at least on my system with my install, that wasn't the case--it asked to re-authenticate every time. I rebooted back and forth several times to make sure, and I was running the (at the time) latest version of Fusion, its Windows tools, and with all Windows updates applied.

Maybe I had a configuration error, but since I had an extra Windows license available (yay for getting nearly-Free Windows through work, 'cause damned if I'd pay MS a penny for anything) and almost never use Bootcamp I gave up and installed separate copies.
 
rasmusDoh said:
Now that we're talking about RAM and Win XP..

Are there any actual advantages of using Win 7 instead of Win XP for both BootCamp and virtualization?

AFAIK i don't have any programs that are only 64-bit compatible - so XP should be able to run all the programs that Win 7 can.

Also there's still some programs that i don't think are quite optimized for Win 7 (nor Vista). It's mostly somewhat older programs, but it's infact mainly programs like those i'll need to run on Windows. It's for work and i have to use the programs they require me to, so i can't even try to find a Mac alternative.

Anyway i like Win 7 on my current Dell, but i mainly like it over XP because of the more "fancy" design like Aero and Snap. But IMHO those are kinda rip-offs from Mac OS X, so i'll get that or something better in Snow Leopard.

Main point: Win 7 or XP? Don't really need the Win 7 design and less RAM needed for virtualization with XP sounds nice..
Click to expand...
Sounds like XP would work just fine for you. I've been thinking about ditching my W7 install and going back to XP. All W7 does is slow me down, aside from looking cool. Jury is still out.
 
Lurchdubious said:
Sounds like XP would work just fine for you. I've been thinking about ditching my W7 install and going back to XP. All W7 does is slow me down, aside from looking cool. Jury is still out.
Click to expand...

Yeah i totally agree! Win 7 do look cool, but so do Mac OS X and that's why you bought a Mac in the first place, right? ;)

Is said i never had a Mac yet, but i really think i'd be faster with XP. Even at a PC i think XP was a tiny bit faster than 7 -> though it looking incredibly boring compared to 7!
 
Makosuke said:
That's the thing; Fusion's documentation says that you only need to re-authenticate once in each environment and then you're good, but at least on my system with my install, that wasn't the case--it asked to re-authenticate every time. I rebooted back and forth several times to make sure, and I was running the (at the time) latest version of Fusion, its Windows tools, and with all Windows updates applied.
Click to expand...

Hmm... that would stink. Works find on my end. What windows are you using, I only have XP on my bootcamp partition.
 
I tried the latest versions of Parallels and VMware. My vote goes to Parallels.
 
CylonGlitch said:
What windows are you using, I only have XP on my bootcamp partition.
Click to expand...
Vista 64-bit. That may be the problem, although it did run in Fusion at first. This may be related, but after a while for no apparent reason I started getting hard crashes in Fusion, to the point it would freeze the MacOS as well (pretty sure at that point I was booting from an image, not the BootCamp partition, though it's been long enough I've forgotten exactly what I was doing). A few other people on VMWare's support site were having the exact same issue, and at least the last time I checked there was no solution available. 3.0 may fix it, but I haven't bothered to upgrade since 2.0 still runs fine with XP on my MBP (not using BootCamp there).
 
Makosuke said:
Vista 64-bit. That may be the problem, although it did run in Fusion at first. This may be related, but after a while for no apparent reason I started getting hard crashes in Fusion, to the point it would freeze the MacOS as well (pretty sure at that point I was booting from an image, not the BootCamp partition, though it's been long enough I've forgotten exactly what I was doing). A few other people on VMWare's support site were having the exact same issue, and at least the last time I checked there was no solution available. 3.0 may fix it, but I haven't bothered to upgrade since 2.0 still runs fine with XP on my MBP (not using BootCamp there).
Click to expand...

Ouch, doesn't sound good.

I run XP, XP64, Vista, Vista-64, 7, 7-64, Ubuntu, and Fedora all through Fusion on my MacBook. BUT none of them via bootcamp except XP. (When I update the drivers for the hardware I have to test it out in all OS versions).

I'm wondering if it is a problem with 64 bits and bootcamp? Donno, sorry, never ran into that problem.
 
I have parallels installed on my macbookpro and overall it gets the job done. The only complaint i have is that it freezes every once in a while. Am thinking about buying a separate notebook from microsoft just for those specific applications.
 
Microsoft doesn't make laptops, and why don't you just use Boot Camp to run Windows on your MacBook Pro instead of purchasing a second computer for the purpose?
 
First off..PD 5 is faster than Fusion irrespective of the Windows version...
If you are like me and use Windows only for Excel/Word, then there is no need to install Win 7 on either PD or Fusion, WIn XP will do just fine..requires less RAM as well as less HD space.

Since I am running the VM on a laptop, I have noticed significant impact on the battery while running Windows. I have MSE installed and running but I have decided to disable automatic updates. I did rather update Win XP manually than to have svchost process consuming 100% CPU ...

MSE too is resource intensive sometimes....I am still debating whether to go for Avira or stick with MSE...

Running the bootcamp partition in either PD 5 or Fusion just does not cut out for me...it is quite slow...
 
yeah ive been trying to get away from bootcamp now that steam is coming out for mac and such but I have this really nice streaming app for the PS3/360 Called PlayOn http://www.playon.tv/ it started off with just hulu espn CNN youtube now it has MLB.tv March Madness Pandora etc. anyway thats the only program that keeps me away from geting rid of bootcamp but im trying to see if that can work out.
 
why me? said:
I'm presently on the road in Europe..about 6,000 miles from my original Windows XP CD and thus dead in the water till I get home. Never again.
Click to expand...

Umm, create an .iso of the Windows XP installation CD and have your licence key in a text file. Burn .iso to disk and rebuild VM. How hard is that? Hell, you can probably load an image from an .iso format to Parallels/Fusion I suspect.

Dave
 
ChrisA said:
Crossover is WINE. WINE is free, crossover overs some suport and makesthose who think they get what they pay for feel good. But it is the same software.
Click to expand...

No. As someone who's used WINE on the GNU/Linux platform for a good number of years, WINE, and Crossover are different beasties. They are basically the same, but Crossover does have proprietary code in it, that is not present in the open source WINE project. The same thing occurs with Cedega.

Dave
 
dpastern said:
No. As someone who's used WINE on the GNU/Linux platform for a good number of years, WINE, and Crossover are different beasties. They are basically the same, but Crossover does have proprietary code in it, that is not present in the open source WINE project. The same thing occurs with Cedega.

Dave
Click to expand...

I have used both WINE and Crossover. They both run the same programs, they both have the same software presets, they are both essentially the same.

Apart from one you pay for. And I choose the free one. WINE wins in my mind.

http://winebottler.kronenberg.org/
 
dpastern said:
No. As someone who's used WINE on the GNU/Linux platform for a good number of years, WINE, and Crossover are different beasties. They are basically the same, but Crossover does have proprietary code in it, that is not present in the open source WINE project. The same thing occurs with Cedega.

Dave

roadbloc said:
I have used both WINE and Crossover. They both run the same programs, they both have the same software presets, they are both essentially the same.

Apart from one you pay for. And I choose the free one. WINE wins in my mind.

http://winebottler.kronenberg.org/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

dave i think the OP and road are meaning that they provide the same functions - regardless of legality. ;)
 
Just checked the prices for a new legal copy of Windows XP Pro to try and get running on my machine :eek:

It is INSANE how expensive it is to buy a 9 year old operating system just because the company has not done better since.

/rant
 
Is it OK to start with Boot camp, and then migrate to a VM like Fusion

ChrisA said:
Crossover is WINE. WINE is free, crossover overs some suport and makesthose who think they get what they pay for feel good. But it is the same software.

I like VMware's Fusion because. Because VMware runs on other non-mac hosts. That way I can take mys VMware images with me and run them on any computer. I have an XP image I run under WMware Server on a Linux system at the office. I can take it home and run it under Fusion on my iMac.


What to use? In order of preference

1) If there is a native Mac OS X version of the software (like MS Office) use that
2) If it will run under crossover/Wine use that
3) Use Fusion
4) Bootcamp

Bootcamp is a last resort but it seems to be needed by people who like games

Do be warned that Fusion means you are running TWO oses at the same time. Your computers will need enough RAM to run both at once and Just add the system requirements for each OS and see what yu need.
Click to expand...

I am an old long-time PC guy... and have FINALLY made the jump to a MAC. Lovin' it too! Windows 7 was the last straw for me.... XP was fine.
I have recently purchased an iMac with 3.06 GHz intel duo, 4gb mem, 1TB, None-the-less I still have two Windows Apps, i wish to run. photo editor (originally from U-Lead called Photo Impact now owned by Corel) , and a CRM database by Maximizer.. 2 questions:

1. Has anyone run Win XP or 7 with either these using boot camp or Fusion?
2. My initial thought was to first try boot camp, and see how much of a pain re-booting would be. If not so good, I'd THEN buy either parallels, or fusion... Having read this thread, sounds like Fusion is the one.
BUT.... what problems have people run into migrating from boot camp to Fusion.. especially concerned over partition issues? gwd ...
 
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