|
|
Parallels vs. Fusion: The Battle wages on...
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
In case you missed it, a few weeks ago I was looking for feedback on switching to using Fusion with a Boot Camp partition from Parallels. Well, I did it with the Fusion demo. Here's a little feedback I have. I'm still deciding whether to purchase Fusion and switch completely.
There's an option in Parallels to remove Parallels info from the BC partition (undocumented; it's called "Cleanup Bootcamp" and it's found in the advanced hard drive options for the VM; it must remove Parallels tools and change boot.ini). I ran that no problem. I then installed Fusion and got it working quickly with BC. Again, no problem. I haven't investigated yet how I would go back to Parallels, but I wouldn't expect it to be too difficult.
Fusion seems almost like a simpler version of Parallels with fewer "niceties." I've noticed a few graphical glitches in Unity that I didn't see with Coherance (tooltips and some windows expose the "hidden" desktop), but nothing significant. I really like being able to access both cores on my MBP, though I haven't gauged performance yet.
Adding an extra virtual hard drive in Fusion wasn't as easy as with Parallels. With Parallels, a new virtual HD image is automatically attached and formatted. In Fusion, after creating the drive, I didn't see it in Explorer. It took a little research (since I've done very little drive management in Windows), but you have to right-click My Computer and manually partition and format the virtual HD. There is no documentation on this anywhere, so I guess VMWare expects people who use their product to use it exactly as if they were working on a PC. Very un-Mac-like behavior.
Other than that little hurdle, I've had no other problems. That's why I come back to all of you who may have been trying out the new Parallels betas. Any improvements? Anything that has pushed Parallels far ahead of Fusion? My demo expires on 12/15, so I'm going to have to decide soon whether to buy (though I probably will).
Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.
Steve
|
Celebrating 10 years and 4000 posts on MacNN!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status:
Offline
|
|
I've tried Parallels and Fusion and found both to be solid. If you intend on only installing and using Windows, then get Parallels. However, if you plan on installing Linux I'd recommend Fusion as I've had issues installing (modern) Linux on Parallels.
I bought Fusion and have benchmarked it against Parallels and found Parallels has slightly better graphics speed and Fusion has support for multiple processors (not that Windows uses them effectively) and Fusion is faster CPU-wise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Does Parallels support 3D acceleration for games like Fusion does?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c
Does Parallels support 3D acceleration for games like Fusion does?
Limited number of games. I found out it doesn't work with Neverwinter Nights or Counter-Strike, the only two games I boot into Windows for.
|
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status:
Offline
|
|
"3-D Accelleration?" I don't think I'd use that phrase with either and would say Parallels is slightly better graphically than Fusion. I have played MS Flight Simulator 2004 under Fusion and it was ok.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Direct3D is VMWare's implementation of DirectX acceleration
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status:
Offline
|
|
Whatever VMWare calls it, Fusion (and Parallels) are still both very weak in the graphics department and hardly worth considering for games playing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c
Direct3D is VMWare's implementation of DirectX acceleration
Actually Direct3D is Microsoft's and not a VMware implementation.
Check out wikipedia if you need to learn more about DirectX and how Direct3D plays into that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by cgc
Whatever VMWare calls it, Fusion (and Parallels) are still both very weak in the graphics department and hardly worth considering for games playing.
Agreed, for now. Direct3D is listed as an experimental feature in VMWare Workstation, but I get the sense that this is an advertised feature of VMWare Fusion. So, the fact that VMWare has plans to make this a supported feature might be something to consider, and VMWare's current level of 3D support may work just fine for some games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
I couldn't get DirectX 9 games to launch under Parallels...granted I have not tried Fusion yet, but it has to be better if they advertise graphics support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Vancouver
Status:
Offline
|
|
I've definitely noticed challenges getting Linux installed under Parallels and am considering dropping the $49 (after $20 rebate and VMware discount) to give it a go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by cgc
I've tried Parallels and Fusion and found both to be solid. If you intend on only installing and using Windows, then get Parallels. However, if you plan on installing Linux I'd recommend Fusion as I've had issues installing (modern) Linux on Parallels.
I bought Fusion and have benchmarked it against Parallels and found Parallels has slightly better graphics speed and Fusion has support for multiple processors (not that Windows uses them effectively) and Fusion is faster CPU-wise.
i've tried parallels with ubuntu 7.10, ubuntu studios, both didnt end welll, however i use fusion with both distros of linux and windows xp, works absolutely great, also duno if its just me..but fusion just seems to be much faster on my macbook then parallels, i open fusion drag it to a different space in leopard full screen it the switch back and forth, hahah works great!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Milan, Europe
Status:
Offline
|
|
I have both Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion (on my Intel Mac mini), besides Virtual PC on my PowerPC G4: well, I still think that Virtual PC is the best product, at least from an interface point of view!
Certainly, both Parallels (see features and visual effects, etc.) and Fusion (see true and complete Cocoa application, etc.) have their strong points: but I really miss, for example the Virtual PC List, with its live previews, and other really well-done features in Microsoft's (but also ex Connectix', of course) emulator.
Innotek's VirtualBox seems to be rather similar - i.e. really well-made - on this front, but sadly it's still incompatible with Leopard.
BTW, strange that VMware didn't implement tabs in their Mac product: it's probably one of the best features of their PC (Windows and Linux) counterpart.
Well, let's hope that Q - available both for Intel and PPC macs, albeit still slow and incomplete (see KQEMU accelerator support, etc.) - will become better and better: today, it's really Virtual PC's "son", so to say.
On other fronts, Parallels surely gets the best point for features, while VMware seems to be more stable: let's hope that also these two good products become even better.
Microsoft, what can I say to you? A real shame that you ditched the best emulator for the Mac sofar, i.e. Virtual PC! Who knows, maybe it will resurrect in some way, especially if you - or others - help the Q project.
In the meantime, why doesn't Apple try to "cure" the - relatively few - VPC incompatibilities with Leopard...?
(
Last edited by Sven G; Dec 19, 2007 at 01:12 PM.
)
|
The freedom of all is essential to my freedom. - Mikhail Bakunin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status:
Offline
|
|
VMWare includes initial DirectX 9 support (with support for Areo coming.) Parallels does not.
|
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
How about external monitor support? Do both parallels and fusion allow you to plug an external monitor into your laptop (in "extended mode")?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yes...I'm using Parallels at home and Fusion at work, both with extended Mac desktop. Extending the desktop in Windows is more problematic, but that's entirely Windows' fault, and not due to the virtualization app.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
I trying to choose fusion or parallels for general usage. Does anyone have a quick idea on *unique* features to each. They seem pretty feature equivalent at this point, I'm trying to find that one thing that makes me choose one over the other. Right now, it's just price since i can get fusion much cheaper.
I just installed trials of each, so I'm looking at them too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: WA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by iamnotmad
I trying to choose fusion or parallels for general usage. Does anyone have a quick idea on *unique* features to each. They seem pretty feature equivalent at this point, I'm trying to find that one thing that makes me choose one over the other. Right now, it's just price since i can get fusion much cheaper.
I just installed trials of each, so I'm looking at them too.
I have Fusion on my 24" iMac and am pretty dissatisfied. The speed is really slow. Fans have posted references to some game play, I can hardly play Vista solitaire!!
I'd rather use BootCamp and save the $45.. But I don't need cross platform apps, I use it to fetch work stuff through IE's termserver. BTW, anyone know of a replacement for IE termserver? (So I can use Firefox instead of IE)
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by fritzair
I have Fusion on my 24" iMac and am pretty dissatisfied. The speed is really slow.
WHAT 24" iMac ?
My 24" iMac (C2D, 2.4 GHz) is plenty fast with Fusion and Vista.
How much RAM did you allocate ?
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: WA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by turtle777
WHAT 24" iMac ?
My 24" iMac (C2D, 2.4 GHz) is plenty fast with Fusion and Vista.
How much RAM did you allocate ?
-t
I have the 2.8 Extreme with 4 gigs of RAM. Like I said it is so slow its virtually unusable. I allocated 2 gigs the last time I tried to use it, crossover is also very slow. Crossover on my MacBook is very responsive, haven't tried Fusion on it.
I used the Fusion "use the bootcamp partition" function. I am wondering if I need to reinstall Vista from scratch. http://forums.macnn.com/images/smilies/bang.gif
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Something is broken with your setup. It should be quite fast. I have allocated 1 GB of RAM, and it's sufficiently fast.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
I d/l a trial of both and installed them at the same time (just not running at the same time ) Still have a hard time choosing. Fusion has a speed advantage (both are sufficiently speedy on my MB2.4), and I like how it does the dock menu better. Parallels works fine too, but nothing is standing out. Fusion is also cheaper. May end up with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
The other option is the free VirtualBox which is owned by Sun now. It ran great (just like it does under Linux), but unstable in the last OS X beta that I tried, but it has since been updated.
If you are looking for a free alternative, check out VirtualBox. Under Linux it seemed noticeably faster than VMWare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by iamnotmad
I d/l a trial of both and installed them at the same time (just not running at the same time ) Still have a hard time choosing. .
I tried both apps early on, and one aspect that struck me the most was Fusion's stability and customer support. I've seen parallels over promise and under-deliver.
Additionally I found that fusion was much more stable. parallels was crashing my computer, not just the virtual environment but my mac, so much so I had to force it down with the power button. Fusion never acted like that and since I need it for work, I'd rather not be dealing with stability issues at 3:00am as I handle a support call from work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kathmandu Nepal
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by njuyhb
How about external monitor support? Do both parallels and fusion allow you to plug an external monitor into your laptop (in "extended mode")?
I use PD, and it does work. But works best in Coherence mode or Single Window mode. Does not always remember its own setting however. Kinda wonky.
|
Dead MBP 2.2 4gig / New Aluminum iMacs / "Old" iPhones / 1st Gen Ipod Shuffle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kathmandu Nepal
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hi all, I use PD but the lack of Firewire driver is driving me nuts. Does VMWare have firewire support in windows? Thanks!
ccfccp
|
Dead MBP 2.2 4gig / New Aluminum iMacs / "Old" iPhones / 1st Gen Ipod Shuffle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: canada
Status:
Offline
|
|
I think its great that we actually get to have this choice, the joy of using a Mac.
However.
Is anyone else as disturbed as I am by the need to now learn and deal with all the issues that come along with running Windows? Stupid dialog boxes, random errors, .dlls, registry problems...I mean the list is endless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|