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.
Which is better, Boot Camp or Parallels?
- Thread starter CooLiSH
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
parallels/fusion would be less hassle
Boot Camp and Parallels are two totally different ways to run windows, kinda hard to compare them.
With Boot Camp you would have to reboot everytime you needed to use Windows.
With Parallels or Fusion, you would not.
Boot Camp is free. Parallels/Fusion is $35+
Boot Camp is a lot faster.
Boot Camp and Parallels are two totally different ways to run windows, kinda hard to compare them.
With Boot Camp you would have to reboot everytime you needed to use Windows.
With Parallels or Fusion, you would not.
Boot Camp is free. Parallels/Fusion is $35+
Boot Camp is a lot faster.
Well whats the best word i can use in Mac?
About msn, its not full like windows especialy the cam.
They make Word for Mac, but there are dozens of alternatives.
That is MS' fault, but again, there are alternatives - like aMSN and Adium. aMSN has video, IIRC.
I enjoy working with the entire windows OS in a single window, minimizing it or maximizing, alternating between OS X and Windows. Parallels is my choice, but this is entirely preference. Office 2008 for OS X is no slouch, unless you are looking for VBA support, which Office 2007 for Windows is the only option.
I definitely would not try the multiple VM thing with an OEM/System Builder's license which does not include transfer rights. Even if it's the same (virtual) hardware this is playing fast and loose with the licensing terms. From the retail license (which includes transfer rights):
If your goal is to have one license of Windows, but multiple physical machines, just put the VM on the fastest external HDD you can manage and run it from that. You'd also get the same apps and data if you do that. Kind of like a roll your own Iomega v.Clone http://www.iomega.com/about/prreleases/2010/010510_vclone.html
B
No, you need a Windows license for each virtual machine. From the legal perspective, there is no difference between a virtual or a 'real' machine.
If you cannot even live with the Mac pendants of those applications, then I wonder why have OS X on your computer in the first place. Just make Windows the only operating system on your computer and be done with it.
It doesn't matter. As I quoted, you can't use transfer rights to share one license between various computers.
One VM on a portable HDD is as close as you can get.
B
I did Bootcamp for a while, but it's really annoying to have to restart the machine everytime you want to switch. I'm now using VMWare Fusion with XP on my Mac mini (2010). XP runs faster this way than it does on my old P4 PC. It helps to have 8GB of ram though. It's nice to file share between the two, and just turn off XP when I'm finished. Seamless.
I use VMware Fusion for the one or two PC-only programs I need to use during the year. Unfortunately I have no choice in having to go to these programs. I go to Windows always with reluctance. Everything else I need and use is on my Mac.The virtual set up allows me to seamlessly move back and forth between Xp and Snow Leopard rather than having to restart my Mac when using boot camp to access Xp..
Another option that's free is Oracle's VirtualBox (used to be Sun). I just upgraded my iMac to 10.6 and my version of Parallels wasn't compatible. I download VirtualBox and haven't had any problems.
With BootCamp, you can run the Mac OS or Windows, but not at the same time. To switch between the two you must reboot the computer.