VMware Fusion vs. Parallels?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by CitiXen, Mar 16, 2009.

  1. CitiXen macrumors member

    CitiXen

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    #1
    Hey guys ordering my MBP 2.66 this week and I do plan on running Bootcamp for games, but I will want to open a new window for a windows related application every now and then. I'm wondering which program for windows on OSX is better? VMware Fusion or Parallels?
     
  2. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #2
    I am sure people will add their opinions, but this has been discussed quite often.
    If you use MRoogle and search for Parallels or Fusion you will find an abundance of threads with all the opinions you can handle.

    Personally, I use Fusion, but it is just a matter of preference
    I think the majority on the board use Fusion, but Parallels has its fans too
    Both do what they say they will do, and do it well

    Woof, Woof - Dawg [​IMG]
     
  3. ceezy3000 macrumors 6502

    ceezy3000

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Location:
    The Valley!!
    #3
    ive used both. i like fusion a lot more although i hear parallels 4 finally beat fusion in da performance arena according to mactech. try the trials and see which you like best. and report back, virtualbox is also an option if u don't know what it is. its basically a free virtual machine with more or less features depending on your standpoint
     
  4. eldy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Location:
    The City
    #4
    For limited use, I would recommend VirtualBox. It's free.
     
  5. capriseyhaze macrumors regular

    capriseyhaze

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2009
    Location:
    florida
    #5
    I love vmware fusion. It runs better meaning faster if you install wi dows directly on fusion but it has more power if you run your bootcamp partition through fusion. Overall its a great program but remember you cant play games on it. Its just uses some other gpu
     
  6. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #6
    Fusion and Parallels are both the same in my opinion, they even both use the same technology ripped from a Google app, Parallels is slightly faster, but Fusion is more stable.
     
  7. pdxflint macrumors 68020

    pdxflint

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon coast
    #7
    ^^ What Google app is that? I know VMWare has been in the virtualization business on the enterprise side for a long time now...so it just seems strange that they'd have to depend on Google for an app to gut. But if it's true, I'd be interested in reading more about it. How about a link?
     
  8. raymondu999 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #8
    Wow. They took source code from a Google app? Didn't know that. Yeh, I've heard Parallels 4 finally is better than VMware 2...
     
  9. fishkorp macrumors 68020

    fishkorp

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Location:
    Ellicott City, MD
    #9
    Where did you hear such a ridiculous thing?
     
  10. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #10
    I didn't hear it anywhere, I found it out myself when I decided to decompile Parallels to find out how it writes to NTFS partitions, so I could make an App to do something similar. If you slow down the installer you can see it installing MacFUSE and NTFS-3G onto your system.

    http://www.tuaw.com/2007/06/21/parallels-using-macfuse-to-access-ntfs/

    Google made and own the rights to MacFUSE.
     
  11. pdxflint macrumors 68020

    pdxflint

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon coast
    #11
    I appreciate the links, but they don't say anything about VMWare. And a commenter on that tuaw.com blog article said this:

    It gets fuzzy, doesn't it...;) Anyway, most of this stuff is way, way over my head, and makes it hurt.
     
  12. gathart macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    #12
    See link on wikipedia....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_VMware_Fusion_and_Parallels_Desktop
     
  13. fishkorp macrumors 68020

    fishkorp

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Location:
    Ellicott City, MD
    #13
    MacFUSE has nothing to do with the virtualization technology present in either app. All that does is write to NTFS drives, which isn't needed at all for either app. They include it as a convenience. Your original claim made it sound like the apps themselves are using Google code, they're not. Neither product is using Google's code for actual implementation of virtualization, which is the key piece here. The NTFS writing is more of a "nice to have" feature, and I have it disabled in my Fusion instance because I have zero need for it.
     
  14. neilhart macrumors 6502

    neilhart

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Location:
    SF Bay Area - Fremont
    #14
    As expected you have all sorts of answers and non-answers. The virtual machine software apps are available free for evaluation, so I recommend you do your own evaluation.
     
  15. simonpickard macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    #15
    The main difference I can tell is that Parallels has OpenGL support where as VMware does not.

    If you're trying to run 3D apps, etc, then this is a make or break feature.

    regards,
    Simon
     
  16. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #16
    I never said anywhere that Macfuse had anything to do with the virtualization technology present in either app, i simply said they both ripped technology from Google. Please read before writing, usually helps in exams too.
     
  17. macDonalds macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    #17
    I think I was turned off by Parrallels early on because an update required me to pay again... and it wasn't long after I bought it. VMware, on the other hand, hasn't required me to pay additional fees for their updates. Plus they're the leader in virtualization so I feel more comfortable using their product.

    VMware all the way.
     
  18. doubletap macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
  19. avediswolf macrumors regular

    avediswolf

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Location:
    Ohio
    #19
    I've used both, and stuck with Fusion.
    Both are great products, I went with Fusion because I caught it on sale.
    I really have nothing bad to say about either, they both work great.
     
  20. fishkorp macrumors 68020

    fishkorp

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Location:
    Ellicott City, MD
    #20
    You said they're essentially the same application because they ripped technology from Google. I'm sure I'm not the only one that read that thinking the underlying code of both applications is something they took from Google. That's not the case. They're using a component, that isn't even a Google original piece. And it's not even an important piece of either application. MacFUSE is completely irrelevant to what the OP is asking. He's looking for an opinion on which is better.

    And thanks for the tip or reading and exams. If I decide to travel back through time I'll keep that in mind ;)
     
  21. dlhuss macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    #21
    Agreed. Try VirtualBox first.
     
  22. ayeying macrumors 601

    ayeying

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Location:
    Yay Area, CA
    #22
    Virtualbox cannot boot a bootcamp partition.

    For Boot Camp partitions, I'd go with Parallels especially for Vista OS. Why? In Parallels, during boot, they do not load every single driver thats loaded in a native boot. VMWare already stated they have an issue that slows down booting due to KBRMGR.exe (which is a apple driver). Parallels uses a new profile during boot so its faster.

    For regular virtual machines, I prefer VMWare Fusion for stability.
     
  23. hohohong macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    #23
    How about program that uses linux?

    I might need to run program using either linux or unix,.... which one will better support them?
     
  24. Jimmy James macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #24
    Is it true that Parallels can only use usb in 1.1 mode? Something to consider if you're going to be moving data from an external drive.
     
  25. jtus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    #25
    I am the IT manager at a small office with only 20 computers and 5 of them are Mac's. I have installed Fussion on 2 of the computers and Parallels on the other 3. I like Parallels much better than Fussion, it runs faster and has less problems. Also Inventor form Autodesk runs on Parallels but will not even load with Fussion. After the last update form Fussion I now have problems with the network. Parallels is the best virtualization software for the new Mac's.
     

Share This Page