I haven't had that problem with VMWare and Boot Camp. I don't use it much, but I can usually just restart the app and it works fine. Sometimes I have to remount the BC partition in Disk Utility though.
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 vs. Parallels
- Thread starter yg17
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I haven't had that problem with VMWare and Boot Camp. I don't use it much, but I can usually just restart the app and it works fine. Sometimes I have to remount the BC partition in Disk Utility though.
I, on the other hand, had a so-so experience with using VMWare and the Boot Camp partition; it didn't live up to my expectations. HOWEVER, I removed the Boot Camp partition and reinstalled Windows within it's own virtual machine. WORKS PERFECTLY. When I ran with the boot camp partition, it seemed to run slow and my fan would be running constantly. Now everything is great; even pre-ordered VMWare 1.0 today (saved 50%). I really didn't need to run Windows natively anyway.
Don't know if there's going to be any difference between the current build and whatever they release on Monday (hopefully there is...unity support for vista, please).
But if you are currently using the beta version, your license will eventually expire (mine said August 17th). I really liked the stability of the software so I went ahead and pre-ordered. The advantage of pre-ordering is that you only pay half the price for the full software, and you get full support and probably any updates as well. And if there is any difference between the release candidate and version 1.0 on monday, to get it after monday is going to cost you more.
Thank you very much for your info. I went to "About VMWare Fusion"
but don't see the license expiration date. Anyway, I better pre-order.
Click on VMware Fusion in the menu bar, the click Licensing. It should have the expiration date there. But, yeah, your best bet is pre-ordering.
That's the thing, really. VMware literally was one of the "founding fathers" of commercial virtualization. Nowadays a lot of datacenters are converting physical boxes to VMs on VMware, Xen, etc. They have a strong base of researchers and really know VM performance inside-out.
I'm using Parallels now, but I use VMware at work and will switch on my Mac when the release the final version. No reason not to.
It's not going to cost more exactly, it's just that you are currently using a free beta until the release is officially out and pre-orders are cheaper. A new version is coming, should be Monday, that will be the actual version 1. What's out now is a Release Candidate. Close, but not quite the full version.
And oxymoron2007, I did have issues with it once. Completely uninstalled it, even getting rid of the prefs and all the VM folders and files. Reinstalled from scratch, and it worked fine. The new ones don't require quite that much effort. That's why they waited and beta tested for awhile before going full release.
I personally prefer VMware.
I use VMWare Workstation 6 all the time. Awesome piece of software.
I believe Fusion is practically the same thing.
Well, thats how I feel from looking at it anyhoo.
I use VMWare Workstation 6 all the time. Awesome piece of software.
I believe Fusion is practically the same thing.
Well, thats how I feel from looking at it anyhoo.
Need a Boot Camp Partition?
I'm leaning a little toward VMware, based on opinions but do you *need* to use a boot camp partition, or can you simply install on the Mac HD and go?
Thanks!
Curt
I'm leaning a little toward VMware, based on opinions but do you *need* to use a boot camp partition, or can you simply install on the Mac HD and go?
Thanks!
Curt
Vmware all the way
I am running Vmware fusion 1.0 (i bought the pre-release), and i have found it to be extremely fast and responsive. It is also very very easy to set up. I had previously been using bootcamp, and was able to utilize that bootcamp partition in vmware.
I have not actually used parrallels, so i cannot judge the difference, but i am EXTREMELY SATISFIED with vmware.
I am running Vmware fusion 1.0 (i bought the pre-release), and i have found it to be extremely fast and responsive. It is also very very easy to set up. I had previously been using bootcamp, and was able to utilize that bootcamp partition in vmware.
I have not actually used parrallels, so i cannot judge the difference, but i am EXTREMELY SATISFIED with vmware.
I did some testing over the weekend with Parallels and VMWare Fusion. I was trying to setup a RHEL 5 VM so I could do some practice database installs and preinstallation tasks, and found that VMWare Fusion performed much nicer than Parallels. I had a few kernel panics using Parallels, actually. So for me, VMWare fusion all the way
Does anyone know if there is a utility to convert a Parallels image to Fusion? I use Parallels and even though it runs really well I would like to have access to USB Serial devices like my GPS. Currently Parallels does not work with it.
- James
- James
tool http://www.vmware.com/products/converter/
written instructions http://www.vmware.com/pdf/fusion_vm_from_parallels.pdf
video instruction http://www.vmware.com/go/fusiontutorials
The thread that wouldn't die. The perfect fix for the question that keeps going and going.
This one is great a ton of useful info.
This one is great a ton of useful info.
I've seen the benchmarks, but, from my experience, Parallels feels faster. I know that networking is faster in Parallels... When I mount my Bootcamp partition and try to play videos from that partition, it will stutter if I'm using Fusion and plays smooth if I'm using Parallels.
As for updates, I would think it's a benefit if a software company continually tries to improve their product...
i only installed parallels yesterday and before that had only used bootcamp, but parallels is awesome. its nearly as fast as bootcamp runs well i can finally have the access to iplayer and 4od that im entitled to and in coherence mode you hardly notice its there. just that ugly start bar but it runs it likeits mac, i thinkthatwhen leopard comes out this will all be included which unfortunalty will screw over vmware and parallels but it says that bootcamp will come with leopard on apples site and apple arrent likely to have an inferior product. but neways for now parallels is awesome only one question shud i buy the full version or wait a month and a half to see what leopard brings???, im a student and £50 with no upgrade rights is a lot of money lol
Leopard doesn't do anything more than Tiger when it comes to Boot Camp. You want virtualization, get VMWare or Parallels. VMWare now works fine in Leopard BTW.
I tried both and I used to prefer parallels, but after installing the latest vmware it's got the edge over parallels.
I had a few issue's activating windows, but other than that its been perfect.
I had a few issue's activating windows, but other than that its been perfect.
Parallels for me
I've been using Parallels since it came out and I recently tried a vmware trial but I'm sticking with Parallels. It seems to have more features that I've grown to like and count on that vmware does not have. Primarily.
- vmware only has crtl-alt-delete as a send keys option. Parallels has many more (e.g. alt-printscreen, crtl-break) if you're using a mac keyboard you have no way to send these commands to the guest OS (without using a 3rd party key mapping tool).
- parallels can start the os in full screen.
- parallels allows you to browse you host drive without booting the OS and when the guest OS is running, the drive mounts on the desktop.
- while a small feature, parallels has the option to ask if you want to mount a usb device, vmware is just on or off. Not a deal breaking feature but shows more thought has gone into the product.
- parallels can map my documents, desktop, pictures and music in windows to your mac.
This is a pure comparison from my experience, I don't have any affiliation with Parallels (in fact I have several friends who work at vmware). I have never had performance problems with Parallels, its uptime matches my mac uptime consistently.
VMware just ported their current features to the mac while I think parallels has put more effort into making a product for the mac.
I've been using Parallels since it came out and I recently tried a vmware trial but I'm sticking with Parallels. It seems to have more features that I've grown to like and count on that vmware does not have. Primarily.
- vmware only has crtl-alt-delete as a send keys option. Parallels has many more (e.g. alt-printscreen, crtl-break) if you're using a mac keyboard you have no way to send these commands to the guest OS (without using a 3rd party key mapping tool).
- parallels can start the os in full screen.
- parallels allows you to browse you host drive without booting the OS and when the guest OS is running, the drive mounts on the desktop.
- while a small feature, parallels has the option to ask if you want to mount a usb device, vmware is just on or off. Not a deal breaking feature but shows more thought has gone into the product.
- parallels can map my documents, desktop, pictures and music in windows to your mac.
This is a pure comparison from my experience, I don't have any affiliation with Parallels (in fact I have several friends who work at vmware). I have never had performance problems with Parallels, its uptime matches my mac uptime consistently.
VMware just ported their current features to the mac while I think parallels has put more effort into making a product for the mac.
forgive the question, I'm confused. what is the difference if u use a virtualizer vs. Boot Camp alone? What do they do or allow u to do that BC doesn't? then what is the point of BC?