Categorized | Announcements & News

Tags : Apple

Dear Gear Diary…

Posted on 12 June 2007 by


Q. On my MAC I want to run a XP Pro VM. Which is better VMWare Fusion or Nova Development’s Parallels? Both seem to offer the same features. All my Apple geek friends recommend Parallels but VMWare Inc. Is very well established in the VM Market. And until August I can get VMWare Fusion for only $39.99 compared to Parallels $79.00.

Just looking for a opinion. Thanks for your time.
Kyle

A. Hey Kyle! Thanks for writing in. I hope I can answer your question for you. Using any kind of VM on either a Mac or Windows box has its advantages and disadvantages. You’ll need to weigh them all when making a decision to run a VM or not.

Performance
Virtual Machines run as a guest machine hosted by the, uh…host operating system. In the case of Parallels or VMWare, you end up running Windows XP on top of your Mac’s OS. The host OS provides the ability for the VM to run. The VM makes use of all of your computer’s hardware: processor, hard drive, CD drive, network card and most importantly, RAM. While the VM is running, your host OS will see a peformance hit as its excess resources are consumed by the VM (and vice-versa). If you want decent performance out of your VM while it runs, you will need to max out its capabilities in its control panel and have a decently configured host computer, too. The better its specs, the better performance you’ll have.

Reduced Functionality
If your goal is to play Windows games on your Mac, and you don’t have a 256MB (or better) graphics card, your graphics capabilities are going to be GREATLY reduced. Unless your VM gives you the ability to shadow video RAM, you’re likely not going to have enough power to push your graphics intensive game.

Hard Drive Depression
Your VM is stored as a single, huge file on your host computer’s hard drive. The bigger and faster your hard drive, the better off your VM’s performance is going to be.

By now, you’re probably going, “ok, ok, ok… I got it. The bigger my host computer, the better the performance of my virtual machine.” You’re right; and I’m done bustin’ your chops on that point. However, before I answer your question on which VM is better than the other, I want to say two words: Boot Camp.

Native vs. VM
My MBP has a 2.16gHz Core2Duo Processor, 2GB of RAM and a 120GB hard drive. The only way to get decent performance out of a VM in OSX is to tweak the RAM up to 1.5GB (leaving 512MB to OSX). Unfortunately, since my MBP only has a 128MB graphics card, Parallels only allocates 32MB of video RAM to the VM. While it will run Windows, 32MB of video RAM isn’t enough to run much of anything.

The best way I’ve found to run Windows on your Mac is to install and run Boot Camp. The only thing you have to realize is that you must run Windows XP SP2 or better with BootCamp; and the disk must be a FULL version as opposed to an Upgrade. Windows makes you eject the CD in the drive and insert a qualifying licensed CD that enables you to do the upgrade. Problems is, at that point in the Windows installation process, you can’t eject the CD. The keyboard driver to enable the CD eject key hasn’t been installed, and the standard MS driver doesn’t support that functionality. As such, you can’t eject the install CD to validate the upgrade license with the qualifying OS CD, so the upgrade install stalls.

Aside from that, Boot Camp provides an awesome Windows experience; and is the better choice, in my opinion. With it, you get the full blown Windows experience, with the full benefit of all your hardware. If you have an Intel based Mac, this is by far, the best way to run Windows on it. Its also free.

However, if you don’t have an Intel based Mac, or if you’re stuck on running a VM, let me say this: VMWare wrote the book on virtual machines. Their VM on the Windows side is awesome. However, neither I or Mitchell Oke have run it on the Mac side. Parallels is cool, and it does what it does very, very well. Its Coherence feature also allows you to run Windows apps outside of the actual VM Windows. So, it looks like you’re running a Windows app natively in OSX, which is pretty cool.

Parallels is proven. The VMWare app isn’t, so this is what I would do:

  1. Use Boot Camp if you have an Intel based Mac. Its free, and gives you the best Windows experience.
  2. If VMWare has a trial version (Parallels does) give it a shot.
  3. Install the Parallels trial at the same time, and compare the two and their performance. Pick the one you like best and performs the best.

I hope all this helps. Please let us know what you end up doing and how it goes.

Send your questions to deargeardiary@geardiary.com.

This post was written by:

- who has written 232 posts on Gear Diary.


Contact the author


  • http://www.geardiary.com Mitchell Oke

    As you can tell by my numerous posts on Parallels, I like it, and it has more than earned a permanent place on my MacBook Pro. I have a fully updated Windows XP SP2 install in a VM and it works great for me with 512MB RAM allocated. When I only had 1GB in my MBP it really struggled in Mac OS X, so I think that 2GB is really mandatory.

    The beautiful thing about Parallels is coherence, which lets Windows programs integrate onto your Mac desktop just like they are Mac apps. Parallels even lets you use Mac shortcuts like Command+V for paste instead of having to resort to the Windows version of the shortcut.

    I also have Windows XP installed in Boot Camp which is use exclusively for gaming. I don’t play games much other than at LANs with my friends, so I use the XP VM in Parallels most of the time.

  • xiadix

    This is the danger of reading aggregate sites. I read on Gizmodo.com that Lifehacker had a story that may make you think a little about this. One of not much publicized features of Paralles is that you can dual-boot and virtualize the same OS. So if you just want to boot up XP to do a quick thing you can VM it…but if you were going to do an extended session, you can reboot directly into it.

    http://lifehacker.com/software/geek-to-live/virtualize-and-dual+boot-the-same-windows-on-your-mac-267905.php

  • http://www.geardiary.com Mitchell Oke

    Excellent point, I have Parallels setup to also allow me to boot into my Boot Camp XP install right inside Parallels, but this has limitations, most of all being that you can’t suspend your session (one of my favourites with a dedicated XP VM install) and it runs the risk of damaging your boot camp partition if not shutdown correctly.

    Definitely worth mentioning though, as some may prefer to only have one XP install on their machine (either due to space or because their prefer to only have one evil Windows install on their Mac).

  • jtroyer

    Christopher, nice article. You do need a beefy machine, but today’s default machines are plenty powerful enough to be running OS X and Windows side by side.

    Everbody, but especially Mitchell and Christopher, come on by and give VMware Fusion a try: http://www.vmware.com/mac. Even though it’s still in beta, it’s stable and should be well worth your time. It has Boot Camp support and now has Unity, where the Windows windows are better integrated into the Mac desktop than Coherence.

    You can also check out how others are doing with Fusion in the VMTN Community Forum: http://www.vmware.com/community/forum.jspa?forumID=371

    John
    VMware Technology Network