Parallels Releases Desktop RC2, Raises Price

[MacRumors]

Parallels has released Release Cantidate 2 of its virtualization software, Parallels Desktop. Among the new features and improvements introduced in this version is a technology called Compressor, which shrinks a guest OS's hard disk image to up to 50% of its original size.

The added features of Compressor brings added price, however. The final version will cost US $79, $30 more than the originally announced $49. Users can still pre-order the software for $39.

Article Link: Parallels Releases Desktop RC2, Raises Price

 

[mkrishnan]

Among the new features and improvements introduced in this version is a technology called Compressor, which shrinks a guest OS's hard disk image to up to 50% of it's original size.

Am I the only one reminded of DriveSpace and the early 90s at this point? I guess it could be a useful feature, though.... I would rather they concentrate their drive tech people on the capabilities to just use normal disk partitions or OS X disk image files (they don't yet, do they?).....

But it's still a great product, and I'm glad they're developing it.

 

[ChrisA]

Qemu?

I wonder if the higher price wil cause more people to loot at QEMU?
http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/

 

[kainjow]

I wonder if the higher price wil cause more people to loot at QEMU?
http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/

Would seriously doubt it.

RC2 seems to be running great for me on my MacBook. Fast as usual

 

[netdog]

While there have been the expected bumps during the beta process, it is a great piece of software. Let's remember too that Windows is far from the only guest that it enables us to run.

 

[Lancetx]

I wonder if the higher price wil cause more people to loot at QEMU?
http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/

You can still pre-order for only $39, so the price increase hasn't taken effect yet. Besides, Parallels Desktop is light years ahead of QEMU at this point, so it's not that attractive of an alternative.

 

[Malcster]

Its an excellent piece of software, no wonder the price has gone up, im thinking maybe they've just realised themselves how good it is!

Even though i preordered at $39, i'd still pay $79 for this if i had too, virtualisation inside leopard if apple does it would be real nice, but atleast we have this if it doesnt, and it works damn well.

 

[DTphonehome]

Pre-order?

I don't even have an Intel Mac, yet I'm tempted to pre-order to lock in the $39 price for when I do get a MB this summer. What do you guys think?

 

[hvfsl]

I don't even have an Intel Mac, yet I'm tempted to pre-order to lock in the $39 price for when I do get a MB this summer. What do you guys think?

I was actually thinking of doing the same. However I want to see what codeweavers come up with first because it looks like it might be a better solution for running Windows programs (for me at least).
http://www.osx86project.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=195&Itemid=2

It might not be quite as fast as Parallels program, but it lets you run many Windows programs in Macs OS X and should support games in the future.

 

[Snowy_River]

I was actually thinking of doing the same. However I want to see what codeweavers come up with first because it looks like it might be a better solution for running Windows programs (for me at least).
http://www.osx86project.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=195&Itemid=2

It might not be quite as fast as Parallels program, but it lets you run many Windows programs in Macs OS X and should support games in the future.

Wow. I could see doing both. Each with its own purpose...

 

[LimeiBook86]

I'm not biting...not yet. I think Apple will come out with something soon enough. It's funny, last weekend I got an Apple 166mhz DOS card for my old Mac 7200, ran Windows 98 perfectly, if you wanted to switch back to the Mac OS you just pushed a hot key and you were instantly switched while the other operating system ran in the background. I'm sure Apple can do this now, most of the intel CPUs have two physical CPUs, this shouldn't be a problem. If they can do it in 1997 they can do it now, and better of course. So I think I'll wait until there is an official solution from Apple.

 

[Silencio]

Am I the only one reminded of DriveSpace and the early 90s at this point?

Nah, it reminds me more of a compressed Apple .dmg image.

 

[kingtj]

I'm holding off too....

To be honest, the single biggest reason I want XP on my Macbook Pro is for the games I can't play in OS X. That means I have to dual-boot into it right now. Considering Apple's BootCamp is only a beta-test snippet of code going into the next version of OS X - there are all sorts of possibilities there.

I'm afraid that at the very least, products like Parallels will become outdated as soon as OS X Leopard is released - making them only useful for those who don't want to update from Tiger.

I think the price increase is largely the realization that they need to lock in as many sales as they can, quickly. The clock is ticking on their viability.

I'm not biting...not yet. I think Apple will come out with something soon enough. It's funny, last weekend I got an Apple 166mhz DOS card for my old Mac 7200, ran Windows 98 perfectly, if you wanted to switch back to the Mac OS you just pushed a hot key and you were instantly switched while the other operating system ran in the background. I'm sure Apple can do this now, most of the intel CPUs have two physical CPUs, this shouldn't be a problem. If they can do it in 1997 they can do it now, and better of course. So I think I'll wait until there is an official solution from Apple.

 

[adrianm]

Am I the only one reminded of DriveSpace and the early 90s at this point? I guess it could be a useful feature, though.... I would rather they concentrate their drive tech people on the capabilities to just use normal disk partitions or OS X disk image files (they don't yet, do they?).....

But it's still a great product, and I'm glad they're developing it.

Compressor just defrags and removes unused blocks... not the same as DriveSpace, that used actually compressed blocks, IIRC.

 

[Some_Big_Spoon]

While they're allowed to charge whatever they want for the thing, almost doubling the price is a sure way to cause gripes and increase people "using it without paying for it" ("piracy" to those of you who aren't big readers.)

 

[dr_lha]

Parallels is awesome. However I do think their excuse for raising the price is bogus (adding in a package that was previously a seperate product) and they're basically cashing in on the popularity of the product, which I expect took them somewhat by surprise.

Still, it's a great product and was a steal at $50, $80 is probably more in line with what the product is worth compared to similar (VMWare) products. I already pre-ordered at $39 so I'm not to bothered by the price rise myself!

 

[ChrisA]

Would seriously doubt it.

I think you are right. Apple's market is people who prefer to pay for nicely packaged products. The only free software most Mac users use is what Apple is re-packaging inside of Mac OSX. I would not be surprized however if Apple includes something like QEMU if not actully QEMU itself with the next major release of Mac OS.

In the Windows PC and Linux worlds virual machines are now free. Even the leading comercial product (VMWare) has a zero price for it's desktop versions . This will happen in the mac world too.

 

[RichP]

Someone send me an email when any one of these virtualization/guest OS programs can run hardware graphics acceleration. Then, and only then, does it become a better solution than bootcamp for those who have a need for Windoze.

 

[gomakeitreal]

great minds think alike!
i haven't got an intel mac yet, but i am also tempted to pre-order a copy given the price increase. but at the same time, the increase in price gives out signal (at least to me) that leopard will have similar tech and they will become outdated.
hate that apple does not let ppl know their roadmap

 

[Makosuke]

Dag nabbit, I'm trying to download the DMG, but the download keeps "completing" after only 16 or so MB of data, producing a useless disk image. Obviously others aren't having this problem, so maybe I'll just wait a bit and it'll go away.

The price increase is a bit annoying, since it's obvious that they know theyr'e going to sell many, many times as many copies of this to Mac users as to Windows and Linux people put together--economy of scale dictates our version should be cheaper, if anything, but since they know the market is so hungry they can increase profit by raising the price a bit.

In any case, I suppose I can't complain since I've been using it free for almost a month and I'm only paying $40 for it, but still. And it really is a great product. The only issue I'm having is that when I suspend the virtual machine, after "defrosting" it the shared folder won't mount. I need to restart Windows to kick it back in. We'll see if this version fixes it--sure hope so, since tossing some particular file over to it is the main reason for using it. I do so hope that they'll implement a cross-system drag-and-drop like VPC has, but I'm not terribly optimistic.

Oh, and although I hate getting involved in grammar-spasms like this, I'll contribute to the apostrophe hulabaloo by linking one of my favorite little things:
http://www.angryflower.com/aposter.html

 

[Rocketman]

hate that apple does not let ppl know their roadmap

Even a timeline-free version for major product lines would be helpful. For example they told schools they would have an eMac replacement in September-ish. That probaly prevented alot of peecee cannibalization sales.

Of course all the "sales force captive" customers were simply told whatever is next will be what is delivered now that eMacG4 was cancelled.

The virtualization thing was probalbly supposed to be a secret but the reverse engineered Boot Camp clone pretty much forced Apple to release a crippleware thing in the interim to prevent bad experences among highly motivated early adopters. Then it became MEDIA news.

So you can bet the real virtualization application is on the fast track.

Gee, I wonder if it will also run Apple][ and Mac 4.2, 7.5, and 8.6?

 

[BWhaler]

I don't even have an Intel Mac, yet I'm tempted to pre-order to lock in the $39 price for when I do get a MB this summer. What do you guys think?

I did exactly this.

Spend money now to save 40 bucks. No brainer.

The only real risk is Apple putting the technology in Leopard. But it's a worthwhile risk, IMHO.

 

[mkrishnan]

Gee, I wonder if it will also run Apple][ and Mac 4.2, 7.5, and 8.6?

None of those are ever going to be *virtualized* on a Core Duo. They can already be emulated, though.

 

[DTphonehome]

I did exactly this.

Spend money now to save 40 bucks. No brainer.

The question for me is: Do I really need this? I so rarely use Windows that it wouldn't be a biggie for me to just reboot on the rare occassion I need it.

But I'm the only one who can decide if if I use it enough to get this.

Can anyone give me some reasons that a very occassional Windows user would buy this, instead of using Boot Camp?

EDIT: Alright, I broke down and bought it. Another reason to get the MB sooner rather than later.

 

[aristobrat]

Someone send me an email when any one of these virtualization/guest OS programs can run hardware graphics acceleration. Then, and only then, does it become a better solution than bootcamp for those who have a need for Windoze.

More like Boot Camp is only a better solution for those people who need hardware accelerated graphics...