Having been a Parallels user since my first Mac, going through version 6, 7, 8 and 9, i took Fusion for a test drive at the beginning of the month. Lets say i won't be buying Parallels again, Fusion seems less intrusive, the coherence mode seems better, can use it on 3 macs and i love the fact my Windows apps pin'd to the dock don't have 2 stupid red lines on it.
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.
VMware Launches Fusion 8 and Fusion 8 Pro With Windows 10, OS X El Capitan and Cortana Support
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Having been a Parallels user since my first Mac, going through version 6, 7, 8 and 9, i took Fusion for a test drive at the beginning of the month. Lets say i won't be buying Parallels again, Fusion seems less intrusive, the coherence mode seems better, can use it on 3 macs and i love the fact my Windows apps pin'd to the dock don't have 2 stupid red lines on it.
Luckily, this site is not prone to holy wars...From what I have seen so far, this is like asking "What is better, PS4 or Xbox One?"This kind of question can trigger a holy war.
Seems like an annual event, Apple upgrades OS X for free, Parallels and VMware looks to extract upgrade fees to have their products run on the newer OS.
or, better yet, they're not giving it away, so that Microsoft can make some money.
(and yes, I know Win 10 is free, but what about all of the software that you load on it?)
In some European countries like Belgium this is normal. You get a 100GB limit with a standard boardband connection that costs +/- $ 30 a month (2TB = +/- $ 90/m). It is quite fast so you could get over your limit in a few hours...
Apple can afford to offer the OS for free since it sells the hardware (and other products)
VMware has to ensure compatibility to all of the changes to OS X and a multitude of other software combinations and configurations
It is offered at a discount, for which I am grateful... because some companies don't even do that much
Would I prefer free upgrades... yep
Will I pay to upgrade... yes, eventually
In my experience Parallels has traditionally had a little better speed performance while Fusion has had better stability, and ability to move VM's to other VMware apps such as Workstation.
Parallels you can do some subscription model thing, Fusion releases updates yearly. (I personally prefer to avoid the subscription model)
For my uses I've been a Fusion fan, but my guess is that both are mature enough product lines that you could pick either and would hardly notice the differences in most cases.
Parallels often does a deal where they bundle up with software deals (MacUpdate, etc..)
VMWare Fusion offers some pretty good education discounts if you qualify (free in many cases)
-----
you can get the 2015 tech preview for free (time limited to December I think) to try it out. (or the full version has 30 day trial period I think)
https://communities.vmware.com/community/vmtn/fusion/vmware-fusion-technology-preview-2015
If you are a Student/Teacher/Faculty (or if you have an organization that might otherwise qualify) often you can get a free copy of VMWare's software through OnTheHub (https://e5.onthehub.com).
Ahhh, the yearly forced upgrade money wagon is here. I am sure Carbon Copy Cloner will be along shortly with the begging bowl too.
Having used both Fusion and Parallels for several versions, I have always stuck to Parallels for Windows and Fusion for Linux etc.
I feel the main area where Fusion trailed Parallels was in graphics performance, up until now only supporting DX9 where Parallels supported DX10.
Now Fusion is on par with Parallels as it supports DX10. I'll be moving over to Fusion because of this, and because Parallels will only allow my upgrade key to activate 1 instance of 11 whereas I could activate 2 instances of 10.
I feel the main area where Fusion trailed Parallels was in graphics performance, up until now only supporting DX9 where Parallels supported DX10.
Now Fusion is on par with Parallels as it supports DX10. I'll be moving over to Fusion because of this, and because Parallels will only allow my upgrade key to activate 1 instance of 11 whereas I could activate 2 instances of 10.
Sorry pal, VirtualPC beat Parallels by several years, although it wasn't native Intel based.
Agreed.....however PS4 IS better. Just sayin'.From what I have seen so far, this is like asking "What is better, PS4 or Xbox One?"
No. Actually my Windows 8.1 installation was originally installed in Boot Camp, then last year when VMware Fusion 7 was released, I used that to convert the Boot Camp installation to a VM. From there, I kept it up-to-date with patches and such, then did the Windows 10 upgrade and it went smoothly, except for the minor issue of the SVGA 3D Adapter Error, that I was able to resolve.
Agreed.....however PS4 IS better. Just sayin'.
Betamax was better than VHS
HD-DVD was better than Blu-Ray
Just saying
I've had better luck with Fusion, though Parallels is a great product too. Honestly they are very close. I originally bought Fusion 3 several years ago, but moved to Parallels because at the time I thought it worked better, but I've since switched back. They both offer free trials, you should download them and see what works best for you.
As a developer who uses VMWare daily, it is rather annoying to have to pay for yearly bug fixes.
This will date me. I was in a pinch and used Virtual PC (before it was Microsoft Owned) on a Titanium G4 Powerbook to install and run a Novell Netware server for some time. Good times.
Only in a handful of cities... their "trial" areas. Hopefully they scrap the entire deal soon rather than deploy it everywhere.
You can only upgrade to Windows 10 on the same machine, or VM, or etc.
If you for some reason erase your VM instead of formatting the existing disc you'll forever lose that key - which is generic, by the way.
Virtual PC wasn't "Virtualisation", that was "Emulation" (x86 apps on PPC).
Parallels was the first virtualisation solution for Mac.
BTW... wasn't Real PC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealPC) older that Virtual PC..?
Virtual PC was an emulator; Parallels is virtualization. They're quite different.
I think they pretty much play leapfrog.
VMWare have a somewhat better rep for solidity and support. Parallels tend to lead the initiative on Windows/OS integration, but VMWare usually catch up. Parallels may be better for games (but again, leapfrog!) In the past, Parallels support for Linux was patchy and rapidly outdated, but they've been better later.
Agreed - Parallels and Fusion are slicker, and better at OS X/Windows integration, but if you don't want to pay money its worth trying VirtualBox first.
You could equally blame Apple for insisting on releasing major OS X upgrades every year. This shouldn't affect well written word processors and spreadsheets much but it is highly liable to break close-to-the-metal applications like Fusion or Parallels, and their programmers like to eat meals and sleep indoors. Their bosses like to drink wine and sleep... in bigger houses. They've already spent the $80 you gave them 2 years ago.
I do remember the days when you got free upgrades or 90% discounts for some software... I also remember paying £250 for the software to start with (and that's before inflation). With certain honourable exceptions, software is a lot cheaper than it used to be.
Well, you could use VirtualBox for free, subsidised by the companies that pay Oracle obscene license fees for commercial databases. It doesn't have the Mac-friendly polish of the others, and game perfromance isn't on their priority list but its not bad...
Microsoft get a bit of money from virtually every PC sold and a shedload of money from corporate licensing -
plus, once you have Windows, you are a customer for Office, Exchange, SQL Server etc. They're also having a huge problem getting people to upgrade from Windows 7, so cheap/free upgrades are a good thing. The "full" version of Windows 7 (the one you technically needed to legally install on a VM or an existing PC that didn't come with Windows) used to cost an arm and a leg, by the way.
Apple make their money selling hardware: OS X exists to sell Macs, not to sell software.
N.B. even VMWare give away some of their PC virtualization software for personal use, as a loss-leader for their commercial/pro products - might explain their past generosity re. upgrades. Guess Mac customers don't work as loss-leaders for corporate sales. Also, they seem to have a lot more competition in the corporate market these days.