Prognosis of Parallels.

[Danorske]

Has there been any update to Workstation? Is there a view of the end of the tunnel? Yea I know, we are still in 2007 but the end is on it's way.

Looking for a little good news.

Ron

[jruschme]

Don't expect to hear anything about a new version until it is definately announced. Parallels appears to have a specific policy of "no wine before its time" (quoting the old commercial. Summarizing a few old posts, though...

Back on June 6, spectre wrote: And a little spoiler ;)
Before any major upgrades we will release update for Parallels Workstation for Linux with some minor bugs fixed (including 2.6.20 kernel support) and Parallels Tools for Linux. It should happen quite soon.

Then on June 23, Andrew@Parallels stated the following: We are going to officially release minor update of Parallels Workstation for Linux 2.2 very soon with compatibility fixes for latest Linux kernel versions. And we are going to compliment it with Linux guest tools (from latest PD 3.0).

Major update 3.x is scheduled for late 2007 and in terms of feature set will be far ahead of PWL 2.2 and even PDM 3.0. I understand that we lost some ground with not updating Windows and Linux versions so long, but I really hope that we will catch up with this upcoming release and our Windows/Linux customers will be satisfied.

On July 9, Ynot "clarified" that statement with the following:
No any correct date, seems minor update for 2.x windows and linux version will be available till autumn.

And we plan to release something for linux and windows till end of this year.

Which spectre further clarified by stating on July 11:
Sorry for any confusion that may have been caused by Ynot's answer, the situation is a bit clearer than it may look like judging from his post :)
Actually, we have quite an extensive development roadmap for Parallels Workstation for Windows/Linux versions.
We are going to release new PW 2.2 version with various bugfixes and improvements soon. And the work is already in progress on the next generation Parallels VM desktop and server versions for Win/Lin hosts, to make sure you'll be able to easily use our virtualization solutions on any OS, be it Windows, Linux or Mac and switch between them without any problems or drawbacks. and:
As a software developer you probably know that a program is generally released "as soon as it's ready" and there is nothing worse than to give end-users an exact date of release and then see how it doesn't happen because of some nasty bug found in the last moments before release.
That's precisely why we try to avoid giving any narrow time frames for the release. But "soon" indicates that we are really working on it and it's on our short-term plans.

(Astute readers may note that at this point we are two months into "soon".)

Perhaps the most honest answer came later that day from Ben@Parallels:
We are already in development for a MAJOR update to Workstation that will include all of the great stuff that we introduced in Desktop, as well as a pile of new features that we can't disclose yet.

Please keep in mind that even though Parallels has had a lot of success (100% due to our users), we're still small and we only have so many man-hours of development to work with. We're doing our best to get everything (Desktop, Workstation and our upcoming Server) out the door as soon as we can.

Good news is that we're working towards total version parity...meaning that when one product is updated, they'll ALL be updated with a few weeks of eachother!

This probably best sums up the situation. We have a small company which must divide its efforts between its current Mac desktop product (gotta beat Fusion!), an announced Server product, and an as-yet-to-be-announced Win/Lin workstation/desktop product. PWS 2.2 probably doesn't rate major efforts as the goal is to get everyone on 3.X, anyway and they can't get the Win/Lin users onto 3.X until after Server ships. (Has anyone seen a scheduled date for Parallels Server?) Asking for more details is a waste of time.

In some small defense of Parallels, they have release the official patch to allow the existing (11 month old) build of PWS to install under Linux 2.6.22, but have not yet released the promised 2.2 mega update.

FYI, all the quotes above come from three threads: Losing senior Workstation users. Where to now? (http://forum.parallels.com/thread12144.html), Neglected Step-Child (http://forums.parallels.com/showthread.php?t=14196), and Will Any NEW version of Linux Install as Guest?
(http://forums.parallels.com/thread13257.html)

[Roaster]

Perfect jruschme!

I couldn't have summed up this better. Currently VirtualBox 1.5 is my favorite and I'm also running VirtualPC 2007 of course both do not have some long before announced features of PWS but both are free in any case.

I guess the market for a Windows version has gone long before as too many competitors are already in that place. So Parallels must focus on a part of the virtualization market which is not too overflowed so far.

Good news is that we're working towards total version parity...meaning that when one product is updated, they'll ALL be updated with a few weeks of eachother!
I like this sentence most. If this is true, why didn't we get any beta of PWS so far?

[emptee]

@Roaster: ACK.

I'm moving to Virtual Box 1.5 just at the moment...

RIP, Parallels.

ciao, Mario

[jruschme]

Perfect jruschme!

I couldn't have summed up this better. Currently VirtualBox 1.5 is my favorite and I'm also running VirtualPC 2007 of course both do not have some long before announced features of PWS but both are free in any case.

As I've said in other posts, I think VirtualBox ma be the biggest threat to Parallels. Comparing VB 1.5 to PWS 2.2, it's probably fair to say that VB is a more than capable replacement with the fact that it is free being gravy. (Never mind the fact that VB 1.5 introduces "seamless" windows to the Win/Lin world.) If VB can deliver 3D, then it may well be game over.

As for VPC, it is, in many ways, a dated product (e.g., no USB support), but is probably the best environment (even better than VMware) for running very old OS's such as Win 3.1 and MS-DOS because its video and sound emulations are of period-specific hardware as opposed to more modern hardware such as AC'97 soundcards.

One more thought about the current state of Parallels... In my original post, I failed to mention the lawsuit brought by Netsys against Parallels' German distributor. Rather than repeat the details, I'll just refer you the article in Virtual Strategy Magazine: Virtualization's Dirty Laundry Aired in German Court Room (http://www.virtual-strategy.com/article/view/2042/).

I just looked on Google, but can't find any updates on the status/resolution of the lawsuit, other than this (http://www.virtual-strategy.com/article/articleview/1988/1/7/)brief response from SWSoft.

[Roaster]

I'll just refer you the article in Virtual Strategy Magazine: Virtualization's Dirty Laundry Aired in German Court Room (http://www.virtual-strategy.com/article/view/2042/).

Yes, indeed, I know this story, too - I'm from Germany, btw. Sounds like Parallels has got some serious problems with its former development partners.

And yes, VirtualBox 1.5 introduced seamless window support - however couldn't get this running on my WideScreen, even after increasing the video memory to about 32 meg. Perhaps I need to do a little bit more research and try again.

[dleuen]

Parallels ditched all their Linux and Windows customers to try to compete in the Mac market. After an initial splash, it looks like the Mac folks are not happy with Parallels either and Fusion is a much better alternative (see comments on digg.com (http://digg.com/apple/Parallels_Desktop_3_0_Feature_Update_really_really _fast)). So with no loyalty to and from its customers, it is just a matter of time before these pages go to some domain squatting page and they are out of business. And it can't happen too soon as far as I'm concerned. I can't think of any other company that has disappointed me in such a big way.

[Roaster]

Parallels ditched all their Linux and Windows customers to try to compete in the Mac market. After an initial splash, it looks like the Mac folks are not happy with Parallels either and Fusion is a much better alternative (see comments on digg.com (http://digg.com/apple/Parallels_Desktop_3_0_Feature_Update_really_really _fast)). So with no loyalty to and from its customers, it is just a matter of time before these pages go to some domain squatting page and they are out of business. And it can't happen too soon as far as I'm concerned. I can't think of any other company that has disappointed me in such a big way.
I'm afraid this will happen in the near future - unfortunately I gave my money away for a promising product with no future from what I see, read and hear :-(

[jruschme]

Parallels ditched all their Linux and Windows customers to try to compete in the Mac market. After an initial splash, it looks like the Mac folks are not happy with Parallels either and Fusion is a much better alternative (see comments on digg.com (http://digg.com/apple/Parallels_Desktop_3_0_Feature_Update_really_really _fast)).

This is one of the things I've found vaguely funny/disturbing about the whole situation. The Win/Lin users feel abandoned by an apparent emphasis on the Mac product. Meanwhile, the Mac users don't seem all that much happier.

I suppose we should consider ourselves lucky, in a way. By the time Parallels has the "unified" 3.X codebase in place to support a PWS upgrade, all the real bugs should have been worked out. Perhaps we should thank the PD users for being our alpha testers. :-)

FYI, according to Wired News (http://blog.wired.com/monkeybites/2007/09/parallels-updat.html), Parallels Server is supposed to be a "few weeks" (is that more or less than "very soon"?) away from a beta release. Parallels is at VMworld this week demoing Parallels Server alpha and the latest PD 3.0. None of the writeups I've seen mentions any PWS update. In the Wired News article, Server is referred to as being "multi-platform", so perhaps something is coming of the unified codebase.

[Jay Levitt]

@jruschme: "very soon" is slightly less than a Friedman Unit.

[jruschme]

Wow... (http://parallelsvirtualization.blogspot.com/2007/09/new-update-forwait-for-itparallels.html)

[constant]

.
There's nothing new that VMWare doesn't already have.

And still a number of things not available, that are currently available in VMWare.
.

[Roaster]

I really can't say that I'm amazed! Yes, of course, it shows good will from Parallels but nothing new as constant said.
So still waiting for the big bang version 3 of Workstation.

[jruschme]

I think the new release has to be taken with the caveat that it is, unfortunately, a maintenance release to what is essentially a "last generation" product that has been largely eclipsed by both commercial and open source alternatives.

Personally, I'm glad to see Parallels finally release this update- over 3 months since its first mention and only one day shy of the start of fall (was it already Fall in Ynot's part of the world?) was really a long time to have to wait.

My big disappointment, though, was that the announcement was not made during VMworld- preferably as part of the PD and PS announcements. I think it would have made a bigger impact and have been a greater reaffirmation of the importance of the Linux/Windows users. (I'm sure the official reason is that the update wasn't ready yet, though I have trouble believing that, at this stage, the extra 10 days made that big a difference in the development/testing process.)

From Ben's announcement, it looks like we'll get our first hands-on with the 3.x architecture when Server goes public in a few weeks. I doubt, though, that that release will support 3-D or Coherence as neither is a necessary feature in a server environment.

Previous posts have indicated that we should expect a PWS release late in the year. Personally, I'm confused as to how that can happen given that there is only a little over a quarter left in the year and PS has not even entered Beta yet. Based on what appears to be policy, we won't see a PWS 3.x announcement until near or even after the PS release date and probably will not see a PWS beta (let alone release until early in the new year). I hope I'm wrong, though...

We can only hope that most of the up front development needed for PWS 3.x will have already occurred as part of the creation of the unified codebase and the porting of PS to Win/Lin.

The killer will probably be the "pile of new features" (i.e., the "new, never before seen stuff") mentioned by both Ben and Andrew that will move PWS 3.x out beyond even PD. Anybody have a clue as to what these might be? They sound, though, like the sort of things that could make for a long Alpha and an even longer Beta period.

[MaximS]

Update: Parallels Workstation 2.2 Build 2204 is available (http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?t=16965)

[jruschme]

A bit more about Parallels Server in InfoWorld (http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/09/26/SWsoft-sees-future-in-multiplatform-management_1.html).

One thing I don't get... is the next Win/Lin product also going to be Parallels Desktop or Parallels Workstation?

John

[Andrew @ Parallels]

jruschme,
Unified Parallels Desktop will be available for all 3 platforms Win, Lin and Mac.

[jruschme]

jruschme,
Unified Parallels Desktop will be available for all 3 platforms Win, Lin and Mac.

Thanks for the clarification... so will PD ultimately replace PWS for Win/Lin or is there some plan for a multi-tier approach similar to VMware (i.e., Desktop for end users, Workstation for VM developers, and Server for... servers :-) with various feature tradeoffs?

John

[Andrew @ Parallels]

In the first release it will be replaced ultimately. In the future... we will see.

[fromans]

Andrew, when are we going to see an actual update to Workstation, not just a maintenance release? The best words to describe Parallels at this point range from "disappointing" to "fail". A paranoid person might easily believe that there is no actual update pending, and that this maintenance release was something to keep people interested until the server edition comes out. However, even a rational person would be skeptical about the future of Parallels given the lack of any major upgrade for nearly one year. Especially when compared to the packages being offered by other competitors. The Infoworld article suggests that more features "should also appear in the next major version of the desktop edition, due in the first half of next year". How many people do you expect to still be using Parallels after nearly 18 months of almost no visible development?

[Roaster]

A paranoid person might easily believe that there is no actual update pending, and that this maintenance release was something to keep people interested until the server edition comes out.
The server edition is the point and it is again a good reason to not release any major version for PWS. The server edition is just a next step to attack VMWare and Microsoft and gets all priority now over PWS for Win/Linux.

At looks like all former customers who ordered a Linux or Win version before, just filled up the cash-box of Parallels to finance the development of the Mac version, right?

[fromans]

At looks like all former customers who ordered a Linux or Win version before, just filled up the cash-box of Parallels to finance the development of the Mac version, right?

It certainly does seem that way. All that money and resources went into the Mac version while Win/Lin was ignored, and for what reason? The new beta of VMware Fusion 1.1 is right on par with Parallels version 3. Is it really too much to ask for some kind of timeline on an update other than "soon"? Some of the Administrator posts from over 2 months ago said "soon" and that in itself is misleading. Soon is is defined as 'within a short period after this or that time'. If that Infoworld article was right and an update for Workstation isn't coming for 6 MORE MONTHS, then I at least want to know so I can buy a new VMware Workstation 6 license and be done with this outdated product.