Is Bootcamp the best option for Windows?

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
15
81
If you don't need a native partition, use VMWare Fusion or equivalent and run Windows in a VM when you need to.
 

ViRGE

Elite Member, Moderator Emeritus
Oct 9, 1999
31,516
167
106
If you don't need a native partition, use VMWare Fusion or equivalent and run Windows in a VM when you need to.
Indeed. It all depends on what exactly you want to do. Bootcamp is native Windows, but it means you have to get out of Mac OS X to use it.
 

MrColin

Platinum Member
May 21, 2003
2,403
3
81
I like VMWare Fusion, or just RDP to a dedicated windows box. I havent tried parallels but fusion integrates nicelybetween MacOSX and many other OS's.
 

joshhedge

Senior member
Nov 19, 2011
601
0
0
Have both a boot camp and VM using VMWare Fusion. Useful for the times when you don't need to do anything GPU intensive but need specific Windows software and then switch to bootcamp for CAD and anything else GPU or CPU heavy, although I tend to run the VM with 4 Threads.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Parallels has the same thing, it's called Coherence.

I was speaking about Parallels. I think Parallels handles multitasking better, but VMware can do some things some of our Senior Engineers need that Parallels can't
 

bearxor

Diamond Member
Jul 8, 2001
6,605
3
81
As mentioned, as long as you're not looking for access to the GPU, then a virtual machine is almost always the way to go. If you need the GPU power, then Bootcamp is the best choice.
 

jalaram

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
12,920
2
81
One compromise is to have a Boot Camp partition and then have Parallels use the same Boot Camp setup in a VM.
 

dagamer34

Platinum Member
Aug 15, 2005
2,591
0
71
Depends on what you need it for. That rare Windows-only app? Virtualize Windows. Going to be using Visual Studio to write a Windows 8 or Windows Phone 8 app? Boot Camp. Playing a game? Boot Camp. Running OneNote? Virtualize.

There is no universal answer. Both have their strengths and weaknesses.
 

vbuggy

Golden Member
Nov 13, 2005
1,610
0
71
Depends on what you actually want to do with it.

IMO Fusion is a bigger faff than Parallels but it's probably the most stable Windows implementation you'll get on a Mac, and is perfectly adequate for dev testing, etc.

Parallels is not terrible in terms of stability, and gives you arguably the best-integrated experience on the Mac for running Windows.

Boot Camp is supposed to give you the native Windows experience, and it does for the most part, but is notably less stable / maintainable than an actual Windows machine along with some 'is this just sloppiness or did they put this in deliberately' performance / etc quirks that you just don't get on genuine quality gear, not Apple's form-over-function interpretation of it.

To actually getting work done in Windows as opposed to Mac-grade cafe-based blogging or light dev work, I'd have to say 'none of the above'.
 
Last edited:

bearxor

Diamond Member
Jul 8, 2001
6,605
3
81
I agree with most of the Parallels vs Fusion comments. Parallels seems to be on a very fast dev cycle and they've been known to throw features and stuff out there before they were really ready for prime time. Though I suspect thats harder to do now that's matured.

Fusion seems slower to increment and add features, but always seems to be the most rock solid, generally speaking.

But hell, there's a 30-day trial for each right? Might as well give both of them a shot if you're not currently using one.
 

Snapshot1

Member
Dec 26, 2011
42
0
0
I have had good success with VMWare Fusion for light to moderate Windows 7 use on a 13" MBA. Haven't had the need for Bootcamp or tried Parallels.

I'm using VirtualBox on a Windows 7 host and it is fine as well.

Snapshot
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,901
2,846
136
IME Virtualbox is much much slower and has a lot more fail. The price is right though.
Hmm, I generally run WXP VMs and VirtualBox seems at least as fast as VMware Fusion, if not faster. VBox's UI looks like it was designed by a Unix vendor, and I believe copy & paste is still missing.

Feature sets can vary; every time I read an Ars review, it seems like Parallels still has the only truly usable 3D acceleration but Fusion gets a little better with each release. But I've used VMware since their original 1.0 release and stability has never once been an issue.

Not yet mentioned is CrossOver/Wine. While I don't use it myself, it could be a great solution for select business-type apps that are well-supported by Codeweavers (like Quicken for Windows). No Windows license required and no guest OS to boot up and waste at least 512 MB of RAM.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,825
1,396
126
I just bought a Windows box instead. You can't reliably do stuff like run Windows-specific firmware updaters for external peripherals via Parallels/VMware. Plus I kinda disliked stealing GBs of memory for a virtual machine. And running Boot Camp was just a PITA, because you had to shut down OS X.

It's easier just to have a second machine.