For me, at least, windows virtualization is a must-have until Microsoft gets their **** together with Excel for Mac. Just let me use the keyboard to navigate menus already dammit.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Parallels 17 Brings Windows 11 and macOS Monterey Virtualization Support, Improved Graphics, M1 Optimizations, and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For me, at least, windows virtualization is a must-have until Microsoft gets their **** together with Excel for Mac. Just let me use the keyboard to navigate menus already dammit.
I've been in that situation before with Parallels. You need to get the original license refunded, that's how they handle it.Funny, I just bought his like last week and now they want fifty bucks.
Actually, it's not so funny.
After buying an M1 Air and finding that there are still a couple of light, Windows-only apps I need when away from my desktop, I bought a cheap (<$300) Hyundai laptop with Windows Home. My desktop virtualization platform is Fusion and I am curious to see what they come up with.
Have you tried CodeWeavers' CrossOver? Let's you run any Windows application without virtualizing the whole OS. Runs pretty good and in my case I've needed for that specific one or two Windows applications.
I think he really literally meant windows 365, which is an OS on the cloud. Not office 365, which is the suite of office applications...
To be fair, Parallels also runs macOS (e.g. Mojave for 32-bit apps) and Linux, as well as Windows; but yes, can't argue how ugly the Parallels icons are.
Do Wine or Virtualbox support running ARM windows on M1 Macs? That is what Parallels is bringing to the table along with added performance and stability. Those features are worth more money to people who need them.
That's the approach I've taken as well; I haven't needed to always have the latest version of Parallels. At one point I was even permitted to upgrade a Parallels 9 license to 15. More significantly, my older licenses haven't been invalidated by the upgrades...
...so I have my main MBP using the most recent version of Parallels [that I need -- I skip releases], while my other Macs can continue using older Parallels versions. This may not work for you if all your Macs are on the latest version of macOS, though (i.e. your older licenses may not run on the latest & greatest macOS).
Someone's probably answered by now (I'm still reading the first page), but
EDIT: @Mike Boreham corrected me below. Sorry, I saw "run macOS in a VM" and replied, overlooking the "M1" part of the question.
Last edited:
You can in the UK too.
I've bought two copies as I think they may be the last examples that you can get a perpetual license for. Should be good for a few years to come.
Sort of, Im still running version 15 on one computer and 16 on another, (for the next 30 seconds anyway).
I am still using Parallels version 10 with Catalina, so... actually there is a difference.
I tried to do this and got this screenshot
When I clicked on the link for "the list of supported guest operating systems" I was taken to this page which says the only supported macOS guest for M1 Macs is Monterey when released.
Just upgraded and tried the new version 17. I had been running a Windows 10 ARM VM on my earlier parallels, which automatically upgraded to Win 11 ARM and became really slow. This new upgrade makes it fly. The whole interface is just much more responsive and things open super fast.
I dislike their pricing model but no one does emulation on Mac better than Parallels.
I dislike their pricing model but no one does emulation on Mac better than Parallels.
You're not aware of all the uses for virtualization. I have two distinct uses for Parallels:
1) test my commercial software on the different platforms I support
2) run Windows-only software on my Mac. In my case, it's solely to run TurboTax Business - which, for whatever reason, has never supported macOS. A Windows 365 subscription would not help with those.
v17 will be subscription-only? How ridiculous! I was ready to upgrade when I read this article - never mind. As an aside, one of the advertised features for v17 is that it'll have Monterey compatibility. I'm running the Monterey beta and my Parallels version (16.5.1) works with Monterey. Hopefully that'll continue to be the case for those of us who don't want to buy into a subscription world.
I just went through the upgrade process and to the payment screen. There's no requirement to enter a subscription, so the article is wrong.
Thanks for the clarification... I read "macOS in a VM" from the original post and overlooked the "M1" criterion. I updated my original post.
I've had the Windows 11 beta running in P16 (now P17) on my M1 Mini for a while now, and it's been fine. Really what's missing here is licensing for ARM Windows. Parallels says that when W11 is released that they'll be able to run it, but that's not all that's required. We need a way to be able to legitimately buy it.
I've said it before, but Parallels needs to negotiate with Microsoft to be able to be an "OEM" and sell licenses directly.
I've said it before, but Parallels needs to negotiate with Microsoft to be able to be an "OEM" and sell licenses directly.
I don't agree with this assessment. While there may be several other options for Mac users who need to run windows apps, none of them are as convenient, easy-to-use, and as performant as Parallels. Your average non-technical Joe certainly isn't going to try and run their Windows apps in AWS. Heck, I've got two CS degrees and I wouldn't even bother doing that. Why bother when for a few dollars and a few clicks you can be done with Parallels? Same thing with probably the most popular 'free' VM s/w option, VirtualBox. While not hard to install and set up, it's way more onerous than Parallels. And Parallels runs rings around VB in terms of performance.
I feel a bit bad for Parallels: they've got an excellent product, but with Apple's shift to M1, it's going to be pretty hard for them. Emulating x86 on ARM's got to be much slower than on x86. Don't know how they can ameliorate that except to implement, in ARM, Windows' device layer? There used to be an open source product called vine (does that still exist) that basically did that at the application API layer I think.