Parallels vs. Boot Camp

dirk · New Member Joined: 07 Apr 2006 Posts: 2

I'm a long-time VMware fan, and downloaded the Parallel's virtualization beta and notice its almost feature identical to VMware Workstation. Anybody have any experience? Seems pretty compelling to have hosted OS X for most of my stuff and Win32 to run ... say Visual Studio ... in "just another window" vs. the dual boot thing. I was suprised to not see more traffic on the subject. Thoughts?

TIA,
D

jase · Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:34 am Post subject:

I'm got a Ubuntu OS install running on Parallels. It works well, but it's very cpu hungry. Even with the guest OS doing absolutely nothing, Parallels is using 20-50% of each core on my dual core Mini. Doing much of anything in the guest OS pegs both cores of my mini at 100%.

Now, I've got one of the Minis with VT-X disabled due to a bug(?) in the firmware. I'm not sure how much of a different VT-X would make.

As it stands now, Parallels would be great for occasional use of an OS, but I think I'd do a Bootcamp dualboot if I needed to spend a lot of time in the other OS.

I hope performance improves, because that's my only gripe with Parallels. Other than that, it's very impressive.

Fox · Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:46 am Post subject:

Note that a beta 2 of Parallels workstation was just posted. I am much more interested in this concept than the dual boot, which I would find inconvenient for working between Mac and PC programs at the same time.
_________________
Mini 1: 2.3 ghz Core i5; 8 gb RAM, Corsair 240gb SSD, 500 gb Seagate XT
Mini 2: 2.26 ghz Core 2 duo, 8 gb RAM, 500 gb Seagate
Also a Cube, 13" MacBook Air, 20" 2.66 ghz iMac & 11.6" Acer 1810TZ running Ubuntu, Mint & openSuse

c789a123 · New Member Joined: 24 Mar 2006 Posts: 15

on the discussion forum of parallels for mac osx, someone posted a vt-x
check program. After running it, my mini's vt-x is enabled! You can try if it works for you also. The CPU usage is very low when the guest os is idel, and can even play video files with VLC (without sound). Anyway, see such good performance, I placed my preorder for that software today.

jase · Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:28 am Post subject:

I wish that had worked for me. the vtx-check program still reports mine as vt-x being supported but locked in MSR and can't be used.

scooper · Veteran Member Joined: 05 Mar 2006 Posts: 988

I don't know if this is true, but I've heard that the Parallel virtualization beta is a total memory hog. I’ve decided to install Boot Camp this week, even though the idea of running Windows right in OS X is VERY tempting. That brings me to my question. Why isn't Apple going the virtualization route? They say Boot Camp will be built into Leopard, but that doesn't seem like such a big breakthrough now that it's out in the wild. There has to be more here, don't you think?

imfullofit · Member Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 133

I used to use vmware on my linux box and had win 98, win 2k, xp sp1 and xp sp2 so that I could log on and give specific instructions for fixing jacked up windows installs on peoples machines. I loved using vmware but I never messed with virtual pc after Microsoft bought it. I think the dual boot is great for gamers who want all the cpu and memory for their games. Virtualization will get lots faster and will be the solution for people who want to play solitare or use some other legacy win32/win16 software. I am sure tons of people have xp licenses and sn's laying around although this IS against microsofts eula. I think it will be at least a year before we see anything really clean on the market too. Also when you look at paying $75-100 for a virtualization program as well as $200 for xp it gets kinda spendy. I know most home users will just rip it off though.

c789a123 · New Member Joined: 24 Mar 2006 Posts: 15

jase · Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 12:55 pm Post subject:

c789a123 · New Member Joined: 24 Mar 2006 Posts: 15

I have installed the upgrade also. So the difference is not in the firmware. Can it be that the CPUs produced at different time have different microcode?

Fox · Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:46 pm Post subject:

A Parallels upgrade came out this morning (or at least that's when I first saw it). It apparently fixes a number of bugs.
_________________
Mini 1: 2.3 ghz Core i5; 8 gb RAM, Corsair 240gb SSD, 500 gb Seagate XT
Mini 2: 2.26 ghz Core 2 duo, 8 gb RAM, 500 gb Seagate
Also a Cube, 13" MacBook Air, 20" 2.66 ghz iMac & 11.6" Acer 1810TZ running Ubuntu, Mint & openSuse

curt · Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:52 am Post subject:

jase · Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:24 am Post subject:

A poster on the Parallels forum just discovered that on some Minis (mine included) that have vt-x disabled, it will actually be enabled if you sleep the mini and wake it up.

Vt-x is disabled for me before I sleep the Mini, and works after.

c789a123 · New Member Joined: 24 Mar 2006 Posts: 15

Fox · Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 5:29 am Post subject:

Parallels Workstation beta 3 is out this morning. I don't have an Intel Mini yet, but I'd sure like to hear how it now works on the Mini!
_________________
Mini 1: 2.3 ghz Core i5; 8 gb RAM, Corsair 240gb SSD, 500 gb Seagate XT
Mini 2: 2.26 ghz Core 2 duo, 8 gb RAM, 500 gb Seagate
Also a Cube, 13" MacBook Air, 20" 2.66 ghz iMac & 11.6" Acer 1810TZ running Ubuntu, Mint & openSuse


	FAQ Search Memberlist Photo Gallery Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

	123Macmini.com - Forums Forum Index -> Alternative Operating Systems	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 1 of 3