Which is better, Boot Camp or Parallels?

CooLiSH

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 9, 2007
39
0
Hi..
I want to install Windows on my Mac to use it for MSN, Word, Music, regular staff not for graphics or gaming. So which should be better Boot Camp or Parallels?
 

Badger^2

macrumors 68000
Oct 29, 2009
1,962
2
Sacramento
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.
 
Comment

Jodlesx

macrumors member
Mar 29, 2009
60
0
Not everyone is able to put up with aMSN and its sluggish interface (although they did just update it, should check it out). And Word for Mac is a joke.
 
Comment

ditzy

macrumors 68000
Sep 28, 2007
1,715
161
If you are not gaming or doing anything that is graphics intensive, then Parallels is the way to go. Bootcamp only makes sense if you need all your computers resources to be working with the app you are using. Or you don't wish to pay for parallels.
 
Comment

theGTIguy

macrumors newbie
Feb 14, 2009
7
0
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.
 
Comment

Tonsko

macrumors 6502
Aug 19, 2010
293
1
Apologies for necro.

Just as an aside, if I were to install a windows 7 VM (with purchased licence), could I use it to run more than 1 VM, providing I don't run more than 1 at a time?
 
Comment

balamw

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 16, 2005
19,368
978
New England
Apologies for necro.

Just as an aside, if I were to install a windows 7 VM (with purcahsed licence), could I use it to run more than 1 VM, providing I don't run more than 1 at a time?
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):

17. TRANSFER TO ANOTHER COMPUTER.
a. Software Other than Windows Anytime Upgrade. You may transfer the software and install it on another computer for your use. That computer becomes the licensed computer. You may not do so to share this license between computers.
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
 
Comment

Winni

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2008
3,188
1,135
Germany.
Apologies for necro.

Just as an aside, if I were to install a windows 7 VM (with purcahsed licence), could I use it to run more than 1 VM, providing I don't run more than 1 at a time?
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.

Hi..
I want to install Windows on my Mac to use it for MSN, Word, Music, regular staff not for graphics or gaming. So which should be better Boot Camp or Parallels?
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.
 
Comment

Tonsko

macrumors 6502
Aug 19, 2010
293
1
Hm, ok, ta. :)

Actually, thinking about it, this is a moot argument - I've just remembered I could use my valid XP licence for a second windows VM :)
 
Comment

iPhisch

macrumors 6502
Jun 22, 2010
338
41
Indiana
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.
 
Comment

fcortese

macrumors demi-god
Apr 3, 2010
2,108
3,054
Big Sky country
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..
 
Comment

mdgolom

macrumors 6502
Oct 26, 2006
319
0
Hi..
I want to install Windows on my Mac to use it for MSN, Word, Music, regular staff not for graphics or gaming. So which should be better Boot Camp or Parallels?
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.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.