I know we don’t usually cover tech too much around here, but I wanted to share my experiences from this past weekend and earlier this week. If you have a Mac and want to run Windows, one of the easiest and best ways is to virtualize the OS. You can run Boot Camp, but then you need to restart and keep them semi-isolated. But what if you want to run both side by side? You have two real options: VMware Fusion and Parallels Desktop. Both recently came out with new versions that supposedly are the bees knees. I own Parallels 3 and paid for the upgrade to version 4 without thinking. What happened next wasn’t pretty.
I installed Windows XP Pro with Service Pack 2 in Parallels 4 as a new virtual machine. First thing I did after the install was try to install Service Pack 3. After the Virtual Machine hanging for a 2 hours, I had to restart it and repeat the process… twice. Not a good first impression. I got all the updates installed finally and threw Microsoft Office 2007 Enterprise and BlackBerry Desktop Manager on there as well. Here’s the major problem: it’s slow as all hell. Whether in windowed or Coherance mode, things are going to lag and drag. Not good when you need a bit of speed with the operating system. For the record, I set it up with 1GB RAM, so there was plenty for what it was using.
So I sat through all the bugs, all the crashes (Parallels 4 didn’t want to shut down my WinXP Virtual Machine almost every time), and all the slowness and got fed up. I downloaded a demo of VMware Fusion 2 and performed the exact same install. First off, it’s fast as hell. The Virtual Machine, whether in windowed or Unity mode, performs almost as well as a native OS. The Unity mode in Fusion works much better than Coherance in Parallels. It’s fast, stable, and just works with everything you throw at it. The other fact that intrigued me was the Virtual Machine file size between the two. Same installs, same software, Parallels used 17gb and Fusion used 9gb. What the eff? If you want a working, fast experience with Windows on your Mac, Fusion is it.
So, what about gaming? Both tout 3D technologies, but only one actually works. I installed Steam on both with Half-Life 2, Portal, and Team Fortress 2. Parallels choked at it all, just like with the regular Windows install. Fusion ran through with flying colors (albeit not extremely high framrates, but still very much playable).
If you need Windows on your Mac, go out right now and get a copy of VMware Fusion 2. There’s no question that it destroys Parallels 4 in terms of performance and user interface, both of which are the key components with using a Virtual Machine. Good job, VMware. Now if only Parallels would give me my money back for such a horrible piece of software…
I use Fusion, but I have to say my experience with 3d graphics under it have shown it be lacking. The only game I’ve tried so far runs as smooth as glass on my new MacBook when I use Boot Camp, but stutters badly under Fusion.
Luckily, most of my use is not gaming.
I have no reason to think Parallels would be any better (and suspect it’d be worse).
I’ve used Parallels in the past and moved away from it as it had notable performance issues with high CPU tasks ( which apparently recovery software does ) and because I moved to 64-bit version of Vista. Which, neither company support Vista Home Premium x64. Before that, my XP installation became toast when I tried to install SP3 and didn’t know I had to update Parallels before I did. …Good article, though, nice stuff to know.
Very informative. I have to keep Windows away from my Macbook, I don’t want to hurt it’s feelings.
Until last year, I used Parrallels. As soon as I heard about Vmware, I installed it. All because the Unity Mode. Now also cause I can run Linux.
Thanks very much for this review. Having tried both fusion and parallels 3 and 4, for basic stuff like excel, word, plus some unique stuff [updating using a usb device for datacards], speed is not noticeable between the two [maybe fusion is a bit faster]. However, usb connectivity is *much* better with fusion, always seems to be a problem with parallels. BUT what makes fusion *much better* is customer support–parallels customer support is non-existent! You have to purchase each upgrade, and pay *again* if you malware or whatever crashes your machine and you need to download the program again. As well, it appears they care nothing on customer service: several emails to support went totally unanswered.
So performance-wise, advantage to fusion for basic tasks, particularly if you use usb peripherals; with respect to customer service, parallels gets an F.