Paralells 7 incompatible with Mavericks?! Why?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by pscl, Oct 27, 2013.

  1. pscl macrumors 6502

    Jun 3, 2013

    im so annoyed about parallels. i bought the 7.0 Version about 1 year ago for around 40€. now there is mavericks and i get an email from parallels staff, that mavericks is not supported. i should buy the newest version. another 40€.


    are they serious? i mean... im sure there is nothing happening with mavericks update that parallels cant fix with a simple UPDATE. im really annoyed.

    how are u feeling about those update-politics?
  2. mark.s macrumors newbie

    Jun 24, 2008
    This happened to me with v2 or v3 (was quite a while ago!) on an OS upgrade. That's when I switched to VMWare Fusion.

    There's no reason for older versions to suddenly stop working, in my opinion. It's just a way for Parallels to force upgrades and make more money.

    I'm on Fusion 5 (one version behind the latest) and it's working fine in Mavericks.
  3. pscl thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jun 3, 2013
    i just made my complaint to parallels... i hope i get an answer.

    thats what you get if you legally buy software. a complete rip-off.


    is it possible to boot my bootcamp installation with VM ware while im in macos?
  4. ohbrilliance macrumors 6502a


    May 15, 2007
    Melbourne, Australia
    This happened to me on Fusion with Mountain Lion. I was furious that with no warning I could no longer launch a VM that I depended on, and that the only way forward was to pay full price (no upgrade available). So I switched to Parallels.
  5. aicul macrumors 6502a

    Jun 20, 2007
    no cars, only boats
    Actually there are several possible reasons;

    But I don't think any of those apply to upgrade to mavericks
  6. pscl thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jun 3, 2013
    all firms complain about software pirating... and those politics may be the reason why many people do the illegal thing. no wonder.
  7. ugahairydawgs macrumors 68030


    Jun 10, 2010
    Is it somewhat annoying to not be supported 2 years after release? Yeah....kinda.

    But in a sense...I get it too. Parallels makes their money off of software sales. If they made a version and constantly updated it to make it compatible with the latest version of the OS it would never compel anyone to upgrade.

    At the end of the day, though, nobody forced us to upgrade to Mavericks. If any of us using Parallels 7 had stayed on SL, Lion, or ML then all would still be well. But I wanted to upgrade to Mavericks, so I had to pay the upgrade fee to get Parallels 9. It's a good product, so I don't mind supporting the company.
  8. pscl thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jun 3, 2013

    i get ur point. but i think its a question of the price. i payed 80€ in 2011, now, again 40€ for an upgrade? Come on. This is too much.
  9. hallux macrumors 68030


    Apr 25, 2012
    I've said it in another thread. Parallels 7 is now 3 versions old (8 and now 9 have come out since). At some point the developer needs to make a decision to not support an older version and dedicate resources to other projects. You DO realize that supporting a new OS isn't magic, right? The developer needs to dedicate resources to review the entire application (sometimes line by line for thousands if not hundreds of thousands or millions of lines of code) for incompatibilities.

    Many people here say they received an email from the developer advising them that the version they're running would not be compatible with Mavericks, did you not get that email last month, before you updated?

    Microsoft is doing the same thing with XP, it was a good OS but there are now better versions (Windows 7 is much faster on the same hardware, I see it every day), so they're no longer dedicating resources to providing security updates for it, not to mention that it's 10 years old.
  10. dan1eln1el5en macrumors 6502


    Jan 3, 2012
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    I weighed it up compared to how much I use Windows and I ended up deleting parallels, just because I don't want their upgrade-policy esp. with Apples one-year upgrade cycle.

    so now I freed up plenty of space by removing XP and Windows 7 from my mac. :D
  11. jkmlaok macrumors newbie


    Jul 12, 2009
    Ft Hood, TX / Bargram, Afghanistan
    I continued paying for upgrades in the early days to Parallels for the features that each new version brought or promised. With both of the Lion releases I have upgrade because they pushed updates for it to work but I lost performance. I have considered VMWare for sure.
  12. Brian33 macrumors 6502a

    Apr 30, 2008
    USA (Virginia)
    I used to be a software developer, and while I agree that new OSes aren't supported by magic, I think it's rarely the case that one needs to review the entire application line-by-line for incompatibilities. Sure, it takes some resources, but isn't that quite an exaggeration when trying to convey the amount of work it is to support another release of the OS?

    So anyway, I'm more of the mind of the OPer -- so when my bought Parallels 6 wouldn't work for Mountain Lion, I decided to switch over to Oracle's VirtualBox. It was a bit of a pain to re-build my VM, but now even if VirtualBox stops working with the next OS release, at least I haven't paid big bucks for it and I'll feel better. :)

    So far it's been great for what I need, too, on 10.8.5. Not sure of Mavericks support, though I bet it works...
  13. hallux macrumors 68030


    Apr 25, 2012
  14. brilliantthings macrumors 6502

    Feb 13, 2011
    Does it work with Windows 7, though?
  15. dakwar macrumors 6502

    Nov 2, 2010
    I would suggest that the trouble is with Apple too. Yearly updates of the OS that end up breaking a lot of software (Parallels compatibility being one of them) is too much, I think.

    I don't know about you guys but I miss the days when an OS lasted a good few years.

    I would suggest that we (those of us who moved from Windows) gave up having to constantly patch DLL files and deal with stability issues that way, to now having to deal with broken software due to OS updates every year. Either way it takes much valued time away from work and leisure (and being part of MacRumors ;)) and forces it to be used with ensuring/reestablishing software compatibilities.

    And if you don't update OS, you fall behind with software availability (e.g. the new iLife and iWork, iCould compatibility, iBooks, etc.).

    Come on Apple, stop causing so much fragmentation on your desktop side.
  16. hallux macrumors 68030


    Apr 25, 2012
    Absolutely, that's the OS I use in my VM.
  17. brilliantthings macrumors 6502

    Feb 13, 2011
    That sounds promising. Any complaints? What does Parallels have that VirtualBox doesnt?
  18. JoeRito macrumors 6502a


    Apr 12, 2012
    New England, USA
    On the positive side, Parallels 8 seems to run fine on Mav's.
  19. hallux macrumors 68030


    Apr 25, 2012
    I can't speak to the differences as I've never used Parallels. No complaints but I only use it for one application once or twice a month, but it does the job.
  20. David29 macrumors member

    Jun 8, 2009
    And ... That's The Answer.

  21. brilliantthings macrumors 6502

    Feb 13, 2011
    Just got rid of Parallels and installed Virtualbox. It's pretty slow so far. But Windows is still ironing itself out. Difficult to know how much of my 4gb ram to allocate. I'm trying 1.5gb.
  22. 50548 Guest

    Apr 17, 2005
    Currently in Switzerland
    Parallels has ALWAYS done this - a totally unjustified move every time a new OS is released...they just look for easy money and nothing else. VirtualBox is the way if you want to run Winblows.
  23. talmy macrumors 601


    Oct 26, 2009
    Parallels 7 works on Mountain Lion even though Parallels 8 came out for it.
    Parallels 8 works on Mavericks even though Parallels 9 came out for it.

    Each version of Parallels works on the current OS and the next one. They even fixed Parallels 8 so it would run on the Developers Preview as well as the release version of Mavericks, which they didn't have to do since they released Parallels 9.

    As far as I'm concerned they are doing a good job with support these days. Now I've used it since it first came out, and I was very critical of support in the early versions but I've been very happy the past 4 or 5 versions.
  24. pscl thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jun 3, 2013
    for any of you who care:

    here is the answer to my complaint from Parallels Staff:

    "Parallels invests and focuses our finite resources on creating superior software to support Windows, Mac, Google, Linux and other communities -- software with the best compatibility and deepest integration with the latest and greatest from those hardware and OS providers. This development and innovation comes with costs, and it’s not feasible to offer free upgrades from older versions of Parallels Desktop software."

    Well i guess this is the standard answer.
  25. pdjudd macrumors 601

    Jun 19, 2007
    Plymouth, MN
    One other thing to remember is that virtualization software relies on the host OS as well - you make changes to the way the host OS works or add in features to way things work, it can affect the way a program has to work. The really good programs like VMware or Parallels have to do a lot of work since they really optimize their performance and taylor it to the host OS for user convenience.

    Virtualization tends to be one of those things that can be OS specific and when things change, things can easily break - especially when we are talking two major releases old

Share This Page