Parallels, Fusion, or Boot Camp on Leopard

genereyes

macrumors member
Original poster
Sep 19, 2007
49
4
northern VA, USA
Not more than a day remaining until Leopard is on sale... so here are some questions I hope someone has some insight into...

Current setup to run Windows on my MBP: I used to use the beta of Boot Camp, got rid of that, and now am running WinXP in Parallels 2.5.

I plan to Erase and Install Leopard tomorrow after buying it at the store in Tysons.

Question

What will be the best way to run Windows in Leopard? Should I put Parallels 2.5 back on my MBP? Should I upgrade to Parallels 3? Should I instead get VMWare Fusion? Or perhaps going back to Boot Camp is in order (even though I don't want to reboot to use the occasional Windows app)?

What do you think?

Thanks in advance! :)


(hehe, saying "Question" earlier made me feel a bit like Dwight from The Office, but that's off topic... :p)
 

genereyes

macrumors member
Original poster
Sep 19, 2007
49
4
northern VA, USA
I actually won't need "heavy hardware support". I develop on my work PC, so I won't need an IDE on Windows on my Mac. I play games on my other home PCs (one WinXP, one Vista) and more often than not play on my Xbox 360, so gaming isn't a concern either.

Thinking about it, the only real uses I have for Windows on my MBP are to connect to the odd web site that is best viewed in IE, to use Streets and Trips GPS, and to use Office 2007.

iWork 08 is great for home use, so I'm not using Office 2007 as much... But if anyone has any ideas for the first two, especially GPS, I'm all ears. Any Mac OS X equivalent GPS program recommended? If not, which is really better, Parallels or Fusion?
 
Comment

tersono

macrumors 68000
Jan 18, 2005
1,999
1
UK
You'll see a lot of Parallels vs Fusion argument, but they both work well. Fusion's a better choice if you want to run a wide range of OS's, but as we're talking XP/Vista here, then go with whatever you feel comfortable - personally I think that Parallels has the better user interface, but I wound up buying Fusion anyhow - go figure (in my defence, I've used VMWare for years, so it was largely habit) :p

The other posters are quite right, though - if you want to use Windows at anything like max performance (for gaming, particularly), then go the boot camp route. Personally I've got XP installed under bootcamp, but usually run it via Fusion, which I've pointed at the Boot Camp partition. That way I have the option to dual-boot if I really need it.
 
Comment

Phatpat

macrumors 6502a
Jun 15, 2003
903
2
Cambridge, MA
Related question, which I'll try to get answered here before starting a new thread:

Parallels or Fusion, which works better with Boot Camp?

I have boot camp installed and working. I use it at work every day, but 95% of the time I don't think I really need the extra performance over virtualization. So I think it would be nice to get Parallels or Fusion and use it to run my existing boot camp partition in OS X. I know these programs sometimes create activation issues, but which will be less troublesome if I'm switching from virtualization to boot camp every few days?
 
Comment

SafariX

macrumors member
Jan 29, 2004
99
1
I have Parallels 3.0 installed booting my bootcamp partition of my 2.2 C2D MBP. Is Fusion faster than Parallels?
 
Comment

jiE

macrumors regular
Sep 1, 2007
105
0
Related question, which I'll try to get answered here before starting a new thread:

Parallels or Fusion, which works better with Boot Camp?

I have boot camp installed and working. I use it at work every day, but 95% of the time I don't think I really need the extra performance over virtualization. So I think it would be nice to get Parallels or Fusion and use it to run my existing boot camp partition in OS X. I know these programs sometimes create activation issues, but which will be less troublesome if I'm switching from virtualization to boot camp every few days?
You cannot use the same windows installation for both parallels/vmware and bootcamp. It requires one each.
 
Comment

tersono

macrumors 68000
Jan 18, 2005
1,999
1
UK
Yep, I agree with gloss. Anybody actually done it with both? Or know which is best?
Sigh. There IS NO BEST. It depends on your personal preference and your particular needs - each one has some areas that are better than the other. VMWare handles a wider range of OSs and the latest beta supports Dx9 up to a point, making it a little more games compatible. Parallels has a far superior UI and in some cases can be faster.

You pays yer money and you takes yer choice, but there is no definitive 'best'. Download both. Try 'em. Make your own evaluation
 
Comment

TimJim

macrumors 6502a
May 15, 2007
887
2
Boot camp install no matter what, because you can always later install parallels and use the boot camp partition.

If your into games don't bother with vc or parallels. If your just going to be doing things that don't require a lot of anything, install windows on boot camp, then buy parallels and use that. That way, you always have the option to use boot camp.
 
Comment

psingh01

macrumors 65816
Apr 19, 2004
1,408
403
Just upgraded to Leopard with Parallels build 3214. Works just fine, I just had to reboot the session cause it stayed "stuck" when it first loaded up.
 
Comment

jonnysods

macrumors 603
Sep 20, 2006
6,396
3,164
There & Back Again
Related question, which I'll try to get answered here before starting a new thread:

Parallels or Fusion, which works better with Boot Camp?

I have boot camp installed and working. I use it at work every day, but 95% of the time I don't think I really need the extra performance over virtualization. So I think it would be nice to get Parallels or Fusion and use it to run my existing boot camp partition in OS X. I know these programs sometimes create activation issues, but which will be less troublesome if I'm switching from virtualization to boot camp every few days?
Hey man, you can use VMware with the BC partition and no activation issues, it was seamless for me (and faster than parallels).
 
Comment

webgoat

macrumors 6502a
Sep 20, 2007
592
0
Austin, TX
Hey man, you can use VMware with the BC partition and no activation issues, it was seamless for me (and faster than parallels).
yeah boot camp + vmware fusion with an oem xp pro disc is what i set up yesterday w/ activation issues taken care of for both os and microsoft office... running windows full screen with fusion giving it its own "space" is awesome!

just make sure you install vmware tools before you activate within fusion, then restart and activate by phone.. say you only installed it on one computer, its been installed more than once, yes you upgraded the hard drive, no you did not upgrade the mother board and the machine will give you a new number

i'm using vmware fusion version 1.1rc1 build 61385, windows xp pro sp2 oem, mac os x version 10.5 leopard
 
Comment

hddad8080

macrumors newbie
Oct 26, 2007
4
0
PC xp to Mac Leopard

I will need to transfer my programs and OS from a XP pro to the new Mac I ordered on 10/26. My major concerns are extensive Lotus 123 spread sheets and photographs. I will want to work on these within the new Mac. All are on NTFS hard drives (internal and external). Other than or in addition to "Boot Camp" I am considering the Fusion products. Since this is my first Mac I would welcome any advice and any potential problem areas which I might stumble into. To me VM is "black magic". I guess I'm not too old to learn.:)
 
Comment

majordude

macrumors 68020
Apr 28, 2007
2,352
4
Hootersville
I have no faith in Parallels after all the networking issues I had with one of the updates. I am an owner and wish they fixed v2 instead of venturing into v3 and screwing the pooch. :mad:

I have been using VMware for about two months (trial version and then the beta once it timed out) and it is MUCH more stable than Parallels. :p

I just did a fresh install of Leo and wonder if I should install the trial of the release (v.1) or get the beta (v1.1) which may work better with Leo. Which would you guys recommend I install? :confused:
 
Comment

webgoat

macrumors 6502a
Sep 20, 2007
592
0
Austin, TX
I have no faith in Parallels after all the networking issues I had with one of the updates. I am an owner and wish they fixed v2 instead of venturing into v3 and screwing the pooch. :mad:

I have been using VMware for about two months (trial version and then the beta once it timed out) and it is MUCH more stable than Parallels. :p

I just did a fresh install of Leo and wonder if I should install the trial of the release (v.1) or get the beta (v1.1) which may work better with Leo. Which would you guys recommend I install? :confused:
if using leopard then use the 1.1 release candidate beta
http://www.vmware.com/beta/fusion/
 
Comment

hddad8080

macrumors newbie
Oct 26, 2007
4
0
How about using VMConverter to make a virtual image of XPpro/Vista within the PC. Installing VM Fusion in the Mac and then copy the PC virtual image from the PC to the Mac. I have not tried this yet since my IMac is enroute. It is my understanding using this technique you won't need an XP install disk for either copy/vm migration. I would be interested for opinions on this as I am not very versed in VM.
Thanks
 
Comment

genereyes

macrumors member
Original poster
Sep 19, 2007
49
4
northern VA, USA
Thanks for the information, guys! :)

If the need arises for Windows on my MacBook Pro once again, I will get Fusion. I did not like the sluggishness and unstableness of Parallels 2.5 (not to mention its hunger for all system resources).
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.