Parallel/Fusion vs Native?

[Oldmanmac]

I got the 2011 iMac for its ability to go both ways. I've been a long (128 days) time Mac user, but wanted PC app compatibility. So, in talking with the Apple salesman he said it would be better to go Native (non emulating).
Sounded reasonable to me.

Bought Win7 and installed 64 bit to take advantage of larger RAM (12G).

Now, to my question: Are there advantages to Parallels? AND is 64bit the better choice? I need help/info.

Thanks for your input.

 

[Brian33]

It depends mostly upon what Windows program(s) you want to run, and maybe a little bit on whether you think Parallels would give you trouble.

I use Bootcamp to run XP natively for my glider flight simulator, and I use Parallels to play Scrabble and some old games like Age Of Empires II and Close Combat, that don't demand as much graphics power as my flight sim.

Both ways work, both ways are a little bit of hassle, setting up, configuring, etc. but not too much.

The main advantage of Parallels, of course, is that it's much quicker than rebooting and you can go back and forth between a Windows app and OS X apps.

Note that you need of a copy of Windows no matter which way you go. Then, Parallels is $70(?) and Bootcamp is free.

 

[Oldmanmac]

I got a license for Parallels through a bundled package.

Brian - are both Bootcamp & Parallels on the same hd/storage device?

Would Parallel require a reboot, like Bootcamp?

And what about 64bit? I hear about it not running a lot of PC apps. Is it too new/revolutiionary?

 

[skorpien]

You can use Parallels with the same partition that you created for BootCamp but is not necessary. You can choose to use a disk image for Parallels and the physical partition for BootCamp. I chose to use the same partition as it preserves programs and settings across both. I did however have to authenticate my copy of Windows twice, once in BootCamp and once in Parallels. This was all a while back so things may have changed.

Parallels does not require a reboot, merely launching the program within OSX. BootCamp requires a reboot.

64 bit Windows allows you to run 32 bit programs. I've yet to run into issues running 32 bit programs on my Win7 64 bit machine.

 

[Ishmumrhmn]

I am not a Mac user, but if I were you, I would definitely use 64 bit Windows, considering you have 12 GB of RAM

32 Bit windows can only utilize upto 2.5GB of RAM, and some programs are made specifically for 64 bit Windows, which gives you a massive performance boost. Just try rendering a 1 minute video on sony vegas with 64 bit Windows, then try the same with 32 bit Windows.

The differences are sky-ground.

 

[therealseebs]

I would tend to use native if you really need high performance. Otherwise, I like vmware.

 

[paulrbeers]

I use Vmware. It generally benchmarks a little slower than Parallels but is generally considered more stable. If I really need raw computational power in Windows, I boot to Windows 7 via bootcamp. For any other needs in windows, I just use VMware. VMware also has Unity where Windows applications run thru VMware, but it to the average user you are just running them like you would a native OSX app. Last I knew Parallels did not have this feature.

http://www.vmware.com/products/fusion/features.html

Further, Vmware is the leader in virtualization software, I guess that gives me warm fuzzies (especially since we use VMWare in all of our data centers).

 

[lixuelai]

Parallels has Cohesion which is supposedly similar. I was a Fusion user that just switched to Parallels so I don't know if it is on par or not. Switched because of the much better D3D performance under Parallels. It was pretty impressive running Dota 2 in Parallels at 2560x1600 with all settings turned up and getting 60fps vs like 2fps with lowest settings in Fusion.

 

[SpinalTap]

Undoubtedly, 'native' Windows via Bootcamp is the fastest and most familiar option - so long as you are content rebooting your Mac when you want to use one over the other.

Then, there are different fans of Fusion and Parallels - not forgetting the free option of VirtualBox - but all of these will be much slower than using Bootcamp.

The other option is to eliminate the inclusion of the Windows OS altogether - and buy a modestly-priced copy of CrossOver Mac XI. This runs most Windows apps at native speed (and all Windows games) - but without requiring Windows. The added advantage is that when a newer version of the Windows OS emerges you don't need it. You can download a free trial to evaluate before choosing to buy.

 

[Oldmanmac]

Thanks! I appreciate all the input.

I do not need a big PC presence. Just a few odds/ends app that haven't been ported to Mac yet. Speed is not a factor.
Ease of use is. If I don't have to reboot into Bootcamp every time I have an itch then time saved IS a factor.

Crossover sounds good, but I've already bought Win7. Experience is expensive!

 

[SpinalTap]

VirtualBox is free...

...while over at macpromoupdate.com 11 Mac programs can be yours for $49.99 - including Parallels Desktop 7.

 

[Oldmanmac]

VirtualBox is free...

...while over at macpromoupdate.com 11 Mac programs can be yours for $49.99 - including Parallels Desktop 7.

That's what I bought, primarily for BusyCal. Same price for bundle as BC by itself.

 

[Brian33]

If you've already got Parallels, I'd definitely recommend you try that first before BootCamp. I was amazed how easily I got Parallels and Windows and apps installed and working. YMMV, of course, but I think it'll do what you want and be much more convenient. I've certainly had a good experience with Parallels, and if it would only run my glider simulator, I'd gladly give up Bootcamp! (I'm using Parallels 6, by the way.)

One thing about Parallels (and probably VMWare Fusion and VirtualBox) and Time Machine: every time you use a Windows program, the virtual machine file on disk gets changed, and it's big (mine is 7GB or so). So Time Machine will back it up after each time the VM is run. You may not want that to happen (or maybe you do). Something to be aware of and think about.