VM Software

[smackababy]

So, the time has come where I must now use a VM for Windows on my rMBP. As much as this sounds like a bad thing, it is good, as I will be using it for work now.

I am wondering if any of you do any parallel type of stuff with VMs? No gaming, just development and what not.

It seems like the highest recommended ones are VMWare and Parallels Desktop. Anyone have experience with these? Or, any others for that matter?


Thanks!

 

[Printer Bandit]

i like parallels desktop.

on my mac, i have 8GB of RAM and intially allocated 4GB to Parallels/Windows. However, it started running slow. When I changed it back to the default 1GB, Parallels ran great.

 

[BlueWeasel]

I really like Parallels. Using it with Win 8.1 on a MBP (2013) with 8 GB RAM. Windows runs much better than I thought it would, but I don't really push it very hard.

 

[Printer Bandit]

Parallels also has a free 14 day trial:

http://trial.parallels.com/?lang=en&terr=us

 

[manly]

I've used VMware since 1999 so I still think it's a great hypervisor.

 

[Kaido]

I'm a big fan of VMware. Parallels bit me a couple times (may have gotten better, it's been a few years now); VMware has been rock-solid for me. Plus you can move your VM to a Windows computer if you need to (cross-compatible).

 

[KeithP]

I am currently using Parallels version 9 (used every version since ver 5) and will never pay for an upgrade from them again. I despise the company. They remind me of the way Quark treated Quark Xpress users back in their heyday...milk the users for every penny they can.

Latest example, last fall after the Yosemite beta came out, Parallels 9 users started asking for an update that would let them run the beta as a guest. VMware worked, VirtualBox worked but not Parallels. The official word was they weren't going to support Yosemite in Parallels 9 until the final version of Yosemite, no beta.

Hey, but guest what? Parallels 10 gets released and the beta worked as a guest under that version. Basically, they were using Yosemite to try to get people to pay an upgrade to the latest version.

That is more or less how they work. They push out new versions as quickly as possibly, often with questionably useful features. However, if you don't upgrade, you will be a second class citizen in regards to compatibility and bug fix updates.

From a usage standpoint, I think Parallels is probably the best VM software however keep in mind unless you upgrade your software every time they release a new version, you will not get proper support.

-KeithP

 

[paperwastage]

I am currently using Parallels version 9 (used every version since ver 5) and will never pay for an upgrade from them again. I despise the company. They remind me of the way Quark treated Quark Xpress users back in their heyday...milk the users for every penny they can.

Latest example, last fall after the Yosemite beta came out, Parallels 9 users started asking for an update that would let them run the beta as a guest. VMware worked, VirtualBox worked but not Parallels. The official word was they weren't going to support Yosemite in Parallels 9 until the final version of Yosemite, no beta.

Hey, but guest what? Parallels 10 gets released and the beta worked as a guest under that version. Basically, they were using Yosemite to try to get people to pay an upgrade to the latest version.

That is more or less how they work. They push out new versions as quickly as possibly, often with questionably useful features. However, if you don't upgrade, you will be a second class citizen in regards to compatibility and bug fix updates.

From a usage standpoint, I think Parallels is probably the best VM software however keep in mind unless you upgrade your software every time they release a new version, you will not get proper support.

-KeithP

well, VMWare Fusion and Parallels seem to be on the same operating mode: yearly release tracked to OS's release date, no "freebie" upgrades unless you bought just before the OS date, possible incompatibilities with new OS (to make you purchase the upgrade)

if you want a truly free software with free updates, then Virtualbox seems to be the way to go. but you have no one really to complain to/take responsibility when you find a bug (whereas you can complain to VMWare if you are under the 1-year support)

 

[MrColin]

No problems running VMWare Fusion 5-7, haven't tried parallels ever.

 

[debian0001]

VirtualBox is free and gets the job done.

 

[smackababy]

I downloaded the trial for Parallels. I'll probably trial VMWare as well. Thanks for the recommendations.

 

[cronos]

VirtualBox is free and gets the job done.

I wonder why nobody else is suggesting this. I've always used VirtualBox and never had any problems. Especially if the need is just simply for development.

 

[manly]

I wonder why nobody else is suggesting this. I've always used VirtualBox and never had any problems. Especially if the need is just simply for development.

It's great that VBox is free and open source. However, it isn't in the class of VMware or Parallels.

Oracle has basically mothballed the dev team that worked on VBox, it's down to a few engineers. I've had major issues with certain features such as USB passthrough.

I liked the performance of VBox (before 4.3.0) but I would not put it on par with the 2 major players. IME VMware tends to be a bit "clunky" but extremely stable.

As an aside, VMware is being sued for violating GPL2 and that could influence me to give Parallels another shot.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

I have been a Parallels user for many years now. (Wow, just looked - my first Parallels purchase was 1.0 in 2006. I have since upgraded several times.)

I don't think there is a huge difference between VMWare and Parallels. They are both worth trying. AFAIK, VMWare is more geeky/open (i.e. you can install more varied guest operating systems) while Parallels is slightly more closed but definitely more user friendly (i.e. "Want to install Ubuntu? Click this button and Parallels will download the latest version for you and install it in the background!") I mean seriously, I just installed Ubuntu for the hell of it one day; the option was just sitting there and I clicked "Install" and it went very smoothly. Haven't really used it (I haven't been a regular Linux user since Mandrake was still a thing) but it's cool to have the option presented so easily.

 

[KeithP]

well, VMWare Fusion and Parallels seem to be on the same operating mode: yearly release tracked to OS's release date, no "freebie" upgrades unless you bought just before the OS date, possible incompatibilities with new OS (to make you purchase the upgrade)

if you want a truly free software with free updates, then Virtualbox seems to be the way to go. but you have no one really to complain to/take responsibility when you find a bug (whereas you can complain to VMWare if you are under the 1-year support)

I may not have made my point clear, I don't have a problem with yearly paid upgrades. My problem was with Parallels not updating the current version of their product to fix compatibility issues because they knew they were about to release a newer version that didn't have the problems and they wanted people to pay for the upgrade.

In my example, compatibility with the Yosemite beta, both of their competitors (Fusion and VirtualBox) could run the beta as guests.

Running a beta OS is one of the many useful features of a VM. Parallels seemed to be using that desire as a carrot to force paid upgrades.

-KeithP

 

[slashbinslashbash]

While I too have tired of Parallels' yearly upgrade cycle, at least there is usually a bundle offered for $50 with other software included. There's one available right now, and it's tempting me even though I don't think I'll have a use for the other software.

https://buy.parallels.com/329/purl-pd10f-mp?x-campaign=15mp