Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

shanemasters · Jun 2, 2006, 04:37 PM

Not really sure if this is old news. I looked at their website and noticed that the retail price has increased

Now might be a good time to pre-order

Chuckit · Jun 2, 2006, 08:18 PM

Wow, thanks for spotting that. Maybe I should go ahead and order even though I don't have an Intel Mac yet…

snoopy199 · Jun 2, 2006, 09:32 PM

That's outragious, 80 bucks (discounted to 40). I'll pass, heck boot camp is faster, gives me access to the hardware and I don't have usb issues with bootcamp like I do in parallels.

icruise · Jun 2, 2006, 10:26 PM

Actually, I think $129.99 for Virtual PC is the outrageous thing (and no, that's not the version that includes Windows XP).

What USB issues, may I ask? I've just turned USB off entirely for Parallels, since I have no need to use USB devices in Windows.

Eug Wanker · Jun 2, 2006, 11:13 PM

Parallels seems very slow to recognize my USB pen drive, and when it does, doesn't see that it's USB 2.

shanemasters · Jun 2, 2006, 11:42 PM

I guess this news was announced on macrumors a while back, but it was news to me when I found out. I preordered it. It seems like a good solution for what I will be using it for. Hopefully Leopard will have better things in store, we can ony wait and see

craigb6 · 07:51 AM

Yeah Parallels have increased the price of their product, but it does also come with some compressor program which if bought separately would cost more. It says on their site, "As part of Parallels’ commitment to simplicity, and in response to many user requests, the company has integrated Parallels Compressor Server - a powerful management tool that can reduce the size of Windows 2000, XP or 2003 virtual hard disks by 50% or more - directly into Parallels Desktop. The enhanced product will be available for sale at $79.99, $150 less than the cost of buying stand-alone copies of Parallels Desktop for $49.99 and Parallels Compressor Server for $179.99. As an extended promotion, Parallels plans to offer the enhanced product at $49.99 for 30-days following its release."

I'm thinking, if I'm considering buying a MacBook around August - December, would I be better off getting Parallels now or waiting?

icruise · Jun 3, 2006, 08:31 AM

Well, if you definitely think you would want to buy, it guess it can't hurt. The only thing is that there could possibly be something better on the horizon. Still, $40 doesn't exactly break the bank.

aristotles · Jun 3, 2006, 02:26 PM

Forty bucks? You guys are complaining about 40 bucks? What do you people do? Flip burgers at Burger King?

moonmonkey · Jun 5, 2006, 06:59 AM

Originally Posted by aristotles

Forty bucks? You guys are complaining about 40 bucks? What do you people do? Flip burgers at Burger King?

Yes.

Hal06 · Jun 5, 2006, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by aristotles

Forty bucks? You guys are complaining about 40 bucks?…

Complaining about the outrageous % price increase would make more sense… but one thing leads to another…

snoopy199 · Jun 5, 2006, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by aristotles

Forty bucks? You guys are complaining about 40 bucks? What do you people do? Flip burgers at Burger King?

I don't think its just the complaining of the 40 bucks, but it appears to be going to 80 bucks after its released.

besides while many people laud the benefits of parallels its an imcomplete application. Its still buggy and many usb devices still fail to work correctly. While I understand that's the nature of the beast for beta programs I do not want to 40 (or 80) bucks for such a buggy program.

Macola · Jun 5, 2006, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by darth-vader000

I don't think its just the complaining of the 40 bucks, but it appears to be going to 80 bucks after its released.

That's one of the advantages of being first to market. At the moment, Parallels is the only serious solution for virtualization on OS X (Q/QEMU is okay, but not there yet). If they charged $200 for it, I'm sure they'd still sell a lot of copies.

harrowww · Jun 5, 2006, 11:40 AM

I think Macola makes a good point: when you're the only game in town, you can kind of do what you please. Although I don't think Parallels is trying to screw up...they released numerous betas and the product has gotten much better over time, and I think it will continue to. I mean, even if it's not perfect, it's $40. And that now includes a compressor tool. Even if you're planning on buying a Mactel in the future, might as well preorder Parallels now instead of for $80 (or more?) later.

emark · Jun 13, 2006, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Icruise

Actually, I think $129.99 for Virtual PC is the outrageous thing (and no, that's not the version that includes Windows XP).

What USB issues, may I ask? I've just turned USB off entirely for Parallels, since I have no need to use USB devices in Windows.

You HAVE to be &^%&^%$% kidding me... Why is VPC outrageous at that price...

yeah, to engineer a software solution such that a PPC - OS X computer to emulate PC processor, insert a PC disk image onto the mac filesystem and enable sharing, emulate graphics, sound, etc...and work on Windows or ANY other wintel OS as it emulates the computer, not the OS...so that's a pretty decent price, even not including the other OS which is a work unto itself.

If Apple hadn't switched to intel chips, there are a good # of people who would love to run otehr OS for select reasons w/o buying and physically storing/toting other hardware...

This post is either a troll or you just haven't had your morning coffee?

emark · Jun 13, 2006, 11:06 AM

As far as the $40 now, $80 later thing it makes perfect sense that they use this business model. For those who are basically beta testing they get a discount.

it is rumored that Apple will implement virtualization, that Boot Camp is just a stepping stone...that may also be true, it might not... but there is risk reward, if you want what they offer $40 isn't much to ask...

Look at all the shareware/software out there that does much smaller, focused jobs that are easier to program...and think about it.

The real rip off to me of all time is the QuickTime Pro. I paid for OS X, paid for ".mac", paid for iLife, and need to pay for QT PRO? As a user that doesn't want to edit video, the fact that you can't "save" video streamed/downloaded to you in a browser (without doing a little hunting around for a way around this) is reprehensible.... And most of the sheep that want to do nothing more than save data ((that someone who bought the quicktime pro app and encoded the media as such chose to stream to them,will do just that)) cough up $29.95 for that teeny little convenience... Now that is a rip off. Most other businesses that sell pro media creation utilities enable the clients to use the data as the author decides (see macromedia/adobe, aladdin, etc.), but Apple bends you over to be able to save files. That is the real rip off in the Apple universe--Save as source/QT movie should be enabled on all clients and subject to the author/media distributor's choice. Talk about the tail waggin' the freakin' dog.

sorry, must need some more coffee myself.

torifile · Jun 14, 2006, 11:43 AM

Support good developers. $40 is nothing for the amount of work they've put in and the importance of having a product like this is for the Mac community.

Eug Wanker · Jun 14, 2006, 01:24 PM

I'm still holding off, hoping for the rumoured virtualization in 10.5.

icruise · 05:05 PM

Eh, I'm guessing that all 10.5 will give us is a slicker form of Boot Camp.

If you can afford to wait for 10.5, one might wonder if you actually need virtualization at all.

Socially Awkward Solo · Jun 14, 2006, 05:17 PM

I'm not surprised they did this. They saw how popular the app had become and how much press it was getting so they decided to try to make more money off us suckers.

Chuckit · Jun 14, 2006, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by Icruise

Eh, I'm guessing that all 10.5 will give us is a slicker form of Boot Camp.

If you can afford to wait for 10.5, one might wonder if you actually need virtualization at all.

If all we get is a slicker way to dual-boot, I'll still want virtualization.

Socially Awkward Solo · Jun 14, 2006, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

If all we get is a slicker way to dual-boot, I'll still want virtualization.

Ya I don't know how much slicker dual booting can get, I mean you can even use your remote at startup.

icruise · Jun 14, 2006, 06:51 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

If all we get is a slicker way to dual-boot, I'll still want virtualization.

I can't tell if you're agreeing with me there or not. I'm just saying that if Eug can wait around for 10.5 and whatever that may or may not bring, it sounds like he doesn't really have a pressing need for virtualization to begin with.

I don't think dual-booting per se can get much slicker, but the experience using Windows could be a bit better (drivers for the iSight, etc, the system time problem, an "official" way to share files between the OSes that doesn't require formatting in FAT32, etc).

Eug Wanker · Jun 14, 2006, 08:10 PM

Yeah, I'm not in desperate need of a Parallels solution, since I only need to run one app, and I don't have to run it that often. Still, virtualization > dual-booting. I'm just hoping 10.5 gives me virtualization. If I KNEW it didn't, I'd probably buy Parallels. Right now I'm on the fence.

torifile · Jun 15, 2006, 11:30 AM

I'm glad I saw this thread yesterday because it reminded me to pre-purchase. The price went up to $50 today.

Eug Wanker · Jun 15, 2006, 04:39 PM

So basically that $80 price is bull... for now.

DeathMan · Jun 16, 2006, 01:49 AM

Will it use your bootcamp partition yet?

dreamBweaver · Jun 16, 2006, 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by torifile

Support good developers. $40 is nothing for the amount of work they've put in and the importance of having a product like this is for the Mac community.

Yes. This took a lot of hard work and they kept giving me extensions on my trial. I guess what I dislike is the lack of wireless bridging. I hope they fix(ed) that.

darth-vader000 · Jun 16, 2006, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by torifile

Support good developers. $40 is nothing for the amount of work they've put in and the importance of having a product like this is for the Mac community.

40 bucks, I agree, 80, no its not worth that. I'm not sure if its sales puffery in showing the 79.99 crossed out but if they price the product at 80 bucks in the future, they may price themselves out of a job.

Second issue which may impact their longevity is the (I think its absurd) rumor of Leopard having virtualization technology built in. I don't really think this is likely especially with them releasing the boot camp beta but if they do, you can kiss parallels good buy. Just look at watson. there's no way anybody will be willing to spend 40 bucks when its built in to the system. Anyways this is all speculation and back to the main topic.

for some parallels is a great tool that is worth 40 bucks. for me the appeal is limited and I find boot camp a better fit.

Eug Wanker · Jun 16, 2006, 08:35 AM

Why do you think built-in virtualization is absurd? I'm not counting on it either, but I think the idea of virtualization is less absurd than the ludicrous idea of Apple switching to Intel, or Apple releasing Boot Camp to run Windows on our Macs.

torifile · Jun 17, 2006, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by DeathMan

Will it use your bootcamp partition yet?

Nope. I wish it would but I'll take it as is. I actually kinda like my bootcamp partition being sandboxed the way it is though - I can keep it lean for gaming.

darth-vader000 · Jun 17, 2006, 12:28 PM

I just saw this on the parallels web site
"* Limited time offer! Buy through 15th of July only for $49.99 and get $30 OFF!"

Perhaps I missed it before but that little burb means the 79.99 price is not a marketing gimick its for real. I'm not really sure the product is worth 80 bucks but then I don't find it all that useful so I am somewhat biased against it in the first place.

Leonis · Jun 17, 2006, 01:38 PM

I paid $40 during the promotion period. The compression utility works great.

I prefer using Parallels since I am too lazy to dual boot to just look at some stupid websites that require Windows