Virtualizing on Mac OS X

[MacMan988]

Hi, I have had the Parallels trial installed although I don't have any experiences with other similar software.

I wonder which virtualizing software is the cleanest among all?

By cleanest i meant the ones that doesn't modify the computer much (put things to Launch Agents, Launch Daemons, Startup Items, installing safari extensions, etc).

Any tips or suggestions?

 

[satcomer]

For production Macs I trust VMware Fusion a lot more.

 

[iMacBooked]

I also recommend using Fusion. It's a lot more reliable and stable than any other Mac virtualization software, according to me.

 

[yjchua95]

Hi, I have had the Parallels trial installed although I don't have any experiences with other similar software.

I wonder which virtualizing software is the cleanest among all?

By cleanest i meant the ones that doesn't modify the computer much (put things to Launch Agents, Launch Daemons, Startup Items, installing safari extensions, etc).

Any tips or suggestions?

I trust VMware the most, because:

1. I've been using it since the days of Fusion 3.
2. Fusion is a lot more secure by providing all sorts of options to isolate a VM. You can even set a VM to self-destruct after a set time.
3. Fusion has much more enterprise-oriented features which I prefer. Parallels is too consumer-oriented. I also find that Fusion provides more raw processor power.

 

[maflynn]

Both Parallels and and Vmware offer trials, I recommend trying both.

I personally think Vmware is the better choice due to the stability of the product, this includes updates. I've been burned by buggy updates from Parallels, they seem (at leas in the past) to rush out a new version or an update with some really nice features, but those features are a bit buggy and you need to wait until they fully fixed them.

Then there's tech support, I find Vmware to be excellent, I've opened some support tickets with them, and they're generally resolved within the day.

There's also VirtualBox which is free but lack of support, features and performance makes it my least recommended option. The price is right though, its free.

 

[960design]

I use Virtual Box on a daily basis to test web / application code for Windows computers and to run Kali Linux. Here's what Kali Looks like on my Mac:

Took a screenshot and well, it really didn't prove or show Kali on my mac, so I took this:

 

[MacMan988]

Thanks for all inputs. I think I should first try Virtualbox before trying Vmware.

 

[mic j]

Thanks for all inputs. I think I should first try Virtualbox before trying Vmware.

Let me know how your installation process goes.

I looked into using Virtualbox but the installation process looked sort of daunting.

 

[CylonGlitch]

I've used all three.

VirtualBox is the cheapest, free. It is also the slowest.
Parallels is the fastest. Does like to push ads for their own products (not 3rd party stuff) when starting up. It is an excellent choice for day to day work. But also one of the most annoying with adding every windows app into OSX as a stand-alone app.
Fusion is the most stable. They didn't cut corners, and everything is well contained. It is also the most compatible; you can copy the VM's from OSX to Linux, to Windows without issue.

Thus, if you are on a budget or just testing minor apps / websites, VirtualBox.
If you are looking for light game support, Parallels. If you're looking for stability, Fusion. (Although the latest versions of Parallels and Fusion are about the same in performance now).

 

[Crichton333]

I use VMWare Fusion, works like a charm.

 

[Traverse]

I've used VMWare Fusion for a few years for Windows 7, Windows 8, OS X Lion-Mavericks, and Ubuntu.

Never had an issue.

----------

I use Virtual Box on a daily basis to test web / application code for Windows computers and to run Kali Linux. Here's what Kali Looks like on my Mac:


Took a screenshot and well, it really didn't prove or show Kali on my mac, so I took this:

Can you post that cloud wallpaper? It's beautiful!

 

[MacMan988]

Let me know how your installation process goes.

I looked into using Virtualbox but the installation process looked sort of daunting.

I didn't have any problem with the installation. I configured the VM with default settings. I had to create a shared folder because sharing clipboard or drag and drop features didn't work.

 

[mic j]

I didn't have any problem with the installation. I configured the VM with default settings. I had to create a shared folder because sharing clipboard or drag and drop features didn't work.

did you have to make a lot of changes to your system using command line or was it an automated install? When I was looking at it, I was running into all these command line changes that need to be performed to install and that sort of intimidated me (I hate doing those deep changes if I am not absolutely sure of what I am doing). If you can provide links to where you went to for this, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

 

[maflynn]

I've used all three.

VirtualBox is the cheapest, free. It is also the slowest.
Parallels is the fastest. Does like to push ads for their own products (not 3rd party stuff) when starting up. It is an excellent choice for day to day work. But also one of the most annoying with adding every windows app into OSX as a stand-alone app.
Fusion is the most stable. They didn't cut corners, and everything is well contained. It is also the most compatible; you can copy the VM's from OSX to Linux, to Windows without issue.

Thus, if you are on a budget or just testing minor apps / websites, VirtualBox.
If you are looking for light game support, Parallels. If you're looking for stability, Fusion. (Although the latest versions of Parallels and Fusion are about the same in performance now).

That's been my experience too, for what I need and use, I wanted stability with a good feature set. Vmware Fusion brings that to the table better then the other two.

VirtualBox is interesting because its open source but I found the feature set lacking and along with the performance of the guest system.

Parallels while faster tended to introduce new features that were less stable and buggy.

 

[MacMan988]

did you have to make a lot of changes to your system using command line or was it an automated install? When I was looking at it, I was running into all these command line changes that need to be performed to install and that sort of intimidated me (I hate doing those deep changes if I am not absolutely sure of what I am doing). If you can provide links to where you went to for this, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

Installation was not difficult and there were to do that requires terminal commands. Once you open the .dmg you will see the VirtualBox.pkg. Run it and it will install VirtualBox to the Application folder. Then run the VirtualBox application and configure your VM, enter the CD, run the vm and it should take you to the Windows installation screen.