14 comments

• 

  Ren

  1 year ago

  If you have a lot memory than you might be able to use Parallels but for the "native" experience and without sacrificing speed Boot Camp is the way to go. Both are pretty stable.
  reply
• 

  timheuer

  1 year ago

  there's a site from a local (scott) who addresses some of these concerns: http://www.on-a-mac.com/
  reply
• 

  James Fleeting

  1 year ago

  I actually plan to have 2GB of memory for now. Might add more in it if needed.
  reply
• 

  Marios Patrinos

  1 year ago

  Hi - I've just made the switch and um and ahed about how to continue to run Windows.
  
  I opted for VM Ware Fusion rather than Parallels due to various reviews I'd read online. This allows you to have multiple windows/linux installations and run them from OS X.
  
  I've found that on my MAC Mini 2GHz, this works best when run on its own without any other applications, particularly iPhoto or iWork apps though this is probably due to the small amount of native memory on the MAC Mini i.e. 1GB.
  
  Fusion has some cool features, in particular Unity which runs the windows apps as if there on your MAC - very cool if you ask me!
  
  No doubt I'll end up trying Bootcamp at some point in the future though I only need Windows for 1 or 2 applications at the moment (4OD, Sky Anytime and BBC iPlayer all of which promise MAC clients [eventually!])
  reply
• 

  kirkr

  1 year ago

  No need to do one or the other.
  
  Set up a boot camp partition, install Windows there.
  Set up Parallels (or VMware Fusion), and point it to Boot Camp.
  
  That way, when you want to run a PC game that may not run in the virtual machine environment of Paralels/VMWare, you can boot it up in Windows. Most other times, you can just use the Virtual machine from OS X, and run Windows that way.
  
  The best part, is that you do not have to maintain 2 copies of Windows, and keep the configuration and software installs in sync - you only have one copy.
  
  I have this set up this way, with WinXP in Boot Camp, and XP/Boot Camp as one of my 2 virtual machines. The other VM is Vista. I can run all 3 concurrently, with cut&paste between them, using a MacBook with 4gb of RAM. Way cool!
  
  However, the only 2 reasons that I have had to run Windows for anything, was for web sites that were ActiveX dependent (had to run IE), or proprietary Visio files. Both of these problems have been solved.
  
  DARWINE project has IE working pretty well under OS X.
  OmniGraffle Pro 5 beta now can read/write Visio files in native format! Hooray!
  
  --Kirk
  
  --Kirk
  reply
• 

  Steve

  1 year ago

  I joined the dark side (a comment from my co-workers) by purchasing my first Mac about a month ago with the idea of using Parallels to run the two Windows apps that I absolutely needed to continue running.
  
  When I told the sales rep at the Apple store that I was planning on running Parallels he suggested that I get 2 GB of memory with my MacBook, which I did. The first thing I did, after initially familiarizing myself with my new Mac, was to install Parallels. That all went very smoothly but installing XP did take some time with all of the updates that needed to be installed. My plan was to try Boot Camp at some point in the future but I've been so happy with Parallels that I doubt that I will ever get to it. I run in coherence mode all day long and it absolutely works as advertised.
  reply
• 

  Jason

  1 year ago

  Another vote here for Fusion. The "Unity" view is the killer feature. It puts all of your Windows apps into their own container, so you can Cmd-Tab through your Mac and Windows apps at the same time. You'll forget you're even running Windows in the background!
  
  For the best experience, get as much RAM as you can afford.
  reply
• 

  dain

  1 year ago

  For the VMware Fusion vs. Parallels debate:
  
  "Coherence" in Parallels does basically the same exact thing as "Unity", running your windows apps just like they were native on the mac. Also, the 3d support in Parallels is better IMHO.
  
  Parallels can use your bootcamp partition which is also cool. This way you get the best of both worlds. I tried this setup however, and once I opened Parallels, Windoze of course flipped out because it thought all of the hardware had changed (likely due to all of the virtual devices). It told me I would need to re-activate! I called the m$ activation line and got it sorted in about 5 minutes.
  
  -Dain
  reply
• 

  domster83

  1 year ago

  I'd put in a vote for VM Ware. I've used it for a few months and couldn't be happier. The Unity mode is nice in Windows, and the support for the varous *nix's is great.
  The only reason I'd suggest using Boot Camp would be if you had a hardware intensive app (video editing, etc) and then its probably better to be running it fully natively.
  reply
• 

  Scott McAndrew

  1 year ago

  @tim heuer: The posts I wrote earlier this year are on my other (older) blog...http://smcandrew.com - just search on Parallels. I actually took my MacBook Pro under the knife and upgraded the hard drive to 160GB. I then Bootcamped Vista, and finally pointed Parallels' latest release at it. Vista is now telling me that due to a "hardware change" it requires I re-register Windows. I haven't had time to fiddle with it yet but hope it doesn't become a big deal. XP us IMO tgecqay to go if you don't gave a specific need for Vista and/or don't have at the VERY least 2GB of ram...
  reply
• 

  Ralf

  1 year ago

  BootCamp gets my vote. I recently installed BootCamp and XP on my friends new MacBook with great results. Installation was a snap and the speed in Windows was the same as on a regular Windows machine. We did a little resource/speed test using AutoCAD on both machines - couldn't tell the difference.
  reply
• 

  Kevin

  1 year ago

  My advice would be to first setup Boot Camp and get everything you need installed and configured on XP/Vista (use XP unless you NEED Vista). Use XP/Vista as needed and see how often you use it. At that point, evaluate if you actually need Parallels or Fusion. E.g. is one of those programs worth the cost to you. If they are, buy one and then point the program to use your Boot Camp partition as a VM. Done. As noted above, you can how run Windows native or through a VM.
  
  One difference in Fusion and Parallels is that Fusion supports dual cores while (as I last checked about a month or so ago) Parallels does not. Both run on dual core systems, but only Fusion actually takes advantage of both cores. I think Fusion runs faster too (and it's built in Cocoa).
  reply
• 

  Ephriam

  6 months ago

  I am newbie... taking a major bite out of the apple (Granny Smith's-LOL) But does running Fusion or Parallel make your os x available to viruses? Or would it be just a windows thing only applied to the windows in bootcamp side? or.... LOL... would it be an anti virus software thing? Or is this a stupid kind of question thing? I also have a MacBook 2.2 MB062LL/B. What is max SDRAM for it? I hear 6GB and now I hear 8GB. Which is it? Also,... sorry so many questions. Why is there NOT a 7200RPM 500GB hard drive for MacBook or Pro? Is there one coming soon? Higher maybe? I ask because I would assume that both cases... More is Better. TIA. Like I said... a newbie.
  
  Ephriam
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 months ago

  With any program that allows you to run mac and windows on the same computer you're getting into that virus stuff and do need an antivirus.
  reply