Is Parallels taking its' users for granted?

Just need Parallels to clarify this for the users.

I've been using Parallels Desktop for some time since it was bundled with MacUpdate, while many of my friends who have been long-term PC users who have switched lean towards VMWare due to it's longer-term reputation overall...

Now, Parallels has got at least 2 competing products in virtualization under OS X - one of which is free and the other is the aforementioned VMWare. Interestingly, one of my better friends bought VMWare 1.x while I bought Parallels - he went with their reputation while I decided to try the upstart (Parallels was the main reason I bought the MacUpdate bundle - I find I do not use any of the other apps at all).

Now, to the main point, while VMWare offers a free upgrade to a major release (1.x to 2.x is a major release), we users of Parallels 3.x find ourselves having to buy the software, albeit at a reduced price, over again. To many users who are in countries that have stronger economic growth, it's all well and good. However, the US Dollar is pulling away from many other users in other countries, and that difference is big enough for us to re-consider, even at a "special upgrade pricing".

Frankly, I am disappointed - if I know Parallels was going to be pro-profit and charge for every single software update, then I'd have gone with the competing product and enjoyed a free upgrade. For me, I'm a student - money does not come easy.

Anyway, this ends my rant... I am pretty sure I am not the only user who feels somewhat cheated... I already have a friend who's paid for the 2.x to 3.x upgrade, and will abandon Parallels and buy a VMWare license instead - such is the disappointment in a company's failure to trust its' users advocacy of their product in conjunction with Apple's growing market share.

 

I completely agree. I bought PD3 and had problems with my Ubuntu VM from day one. It took months to get working Parallels Tools for it. After seeing VMWare offer free upgrades for Fusion users I was hoping for the same here, but was disappointed again. VMWare is offering a $30 rebate to users of competitive products, so I could switch to VMWare Fusion for the same amount of money as it would cost me to upgrade to PD4, and I'm honestly having a hard time coming up with a reason not to.

 

I can just suggest to test following, our Parallels Desktop version 4 to test with VmWare and just check which one is best from stability point

 

Hi John,

Thanks for replying. I appreciate that you've been helpful as much as you can with the Ubuntu issue. If I decide to stick with Parallels you will be one of the reasons

 

As a customer who has used Parallels for roughly 2 years and purchased multiple versions of Parallels already, I'm disappointed that I will have to pay even more money to upgrade to 4.0. When 3.0 was announced, I pre-ordered and I don't feel like all of the promises made on the Parallels 3.0 announcement page have even been met.

The announcement for 3.0 included:

"OpenGL and DirectX support
Support for graphics hardware
Vista Aero coming soon"

(http://web.archive.org/web/20070603174206/http://www.parallels.com/products/desktop/upgrade)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Parallels still doesn't have support for Aero (and the implied DirectX 9, since Aero requires DX9).

Also, according to Ars Technica, "Ben said that other things we can expect are multi-core virtual machines/virtual SMP" during MWSF 2007 (http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/1/11/6582). This is now a promised feature of Parallels 4.0.

I put faith in the Parallels team when I paid for a product that I had not yet used under the assumption that all promised features would be delivered. Now I am expected to purchase another version to get these features? This is even more disappointing considering that VMWare Fusion 2.0 is a free upgrade for users of 1.x.

Can you provide a single reason that I shouldn't buy Fusion at the discounted price for Parallels users instead of upgrading to Parallels 4.0? VMWare seems to at least treat their customers right. This is your chance to keep a customer.

 

Aero
* a 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
* 1 GB of system memory
* a DirectX 9 compatible graphics processor with a Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) driver, Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware, and a minimum of 128 MB of Video RAM
* 40 GB hard drive with 15 GB free space
* DVD-ROM Drive
* audio output and Internet access

The minimum requirements for graphics cards from the major vendors include the Radeon 9500 from ATI Technologies, the GeForce FX series from NVIDIA, and even the Intel GMA 950. Though the last driver from NVIDIA to support the GeForce FX series on Vista was 96.85 [1],[7] Microsoft's WDDM drivers for NVIDIA graphics continue to support the GeForce FX series;[8] NVIDIA's current WDDM drivers support the GeForce 6 and later series. Though some of XGI Technology's Volari GPUs supported DirectX 9, no Microsoft WDDM drivers shipped with Vista and XGI has exited the graphics card business, so Volari cards apparently will not work with Windows Aero.

No reason can be provided, it is up to your decision to choose which virtualization software you decide to use, only I want to say that we are doing our best to provide as more features as possible, and they need to be stable , not to claim we have support for Mac and fail on WWDC

 

What do you say about the fact that this was a feature promised to me when I upgraded Parallels 3.0? Does Parallels not feel obligated to deliver on that promise without me paying another $40? Honestly, it's false advertising. If it's not illegal, it's certainly immoral.

 

I maintain that Parallels server is really just a $40 product, priced at $1000. I used the beta builds until I read the announced price and dropped it immediately. VMware gives their server product away for free, and you charge $1000 for a lesser product. That's crazy. There are no magical features that make it worth that much money. And to the OP's question, yes Parallels is taking its users for granted. I haven't been able to use Parallels 3 for most of 2008 because of its lack of upgrades and OS support. Now all of a sudden they release all of the promised upgrades, but for a price $39. That's just one more slap in the face. I think it's a sham and people should refuse to pay it. I know I will. I also want a refund for my Parallels Workstation for Win/Lin, seeing as it hasn't worked as advertised yet. At least Parallels for Mac worked a year ago when I bought it, even though it was outdated shortly thereafter. Don't believe me? Look at some of these threads dating back to January 2008, promising more Linux support in future builds. It's now November and they want to charge you for it. Think about it.

 

That's another thing: I haven't been able to run Ubuntu properly for about a year. Linux support in Parallels is atrocious and I'm not going to pay $40 to get it to work as it should have in the first place.

 

I can only say, we respect any opinion here on forum, but I still think, that if we compare product it would be $1000 cost,
just imagine iPhone support for remote Parallels Desktop

 

I've taken the liberty of finding some of these threads mentioning these promised "features". Take a peek and see this gross injustice. What are you going to do to make good on this, Parallels?!

http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?t=19052

http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?t=20239

 

iPhone support? That's a joke. How many people do you think want to check on their servers from an iPhone? That's a security nightmare disguised as a campy little feature. I'm talking about the promised Linux support that was supposed to magic its way into Parallels Desktop 3. It's not there. Now you are sending me an email telling me I can get it for $39 more dollars after I've already paid for Parallels Desktop AND the Premium upgrade that only gave me a couple of Acronis programs? This is outrageous!

 

Please help me make these issues known on Digg:

http://digg.com/software/Broken_promises_from_Parallels

 

Linux support is fixed except 3 distro in build 5624, and it is coming new build for upcoming and current for total 6.
As for iPhone it is first mobile solution, and several organizations are very interested in this

 

Just in case you missed it, read my post here:

http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?p=129101#post129101

 

I'm fully updated and at build 5608.

 

There have been a good few mentions of certain features (64-bit/multi-core support for starters) from Parallels staff members on these boards about how they would be included in a free update in the 3.x series. I refrained from upgrading to version 3.0 for a long time until I read these posts and decided to take the plunge knowing that the money would stretch quite a bit. Clearly the same cannot be said for Parallel's development's budget!

The features mentioned in these statements not happened in the 3.x branch, and now everything has now just gone into version 4.0 which is a $39.99 upgrade for everyone (which is even worse for the UK folk because it's calculated at £35 (or $53)). Those statements indicating said features were at best overly optimistic and at worst irresponsible.

I cannot see myself committing to Parallels products from now on due to the way all of this has been conducted. Do NOT make statements that cannot be followed through.

 

Speaking of promises that aren't followed through on. Have you purchased Parallels Workstation for Win/Lin? If you did, you're a sucker just like me. It hasn't been updated for almost 2 years. Despite promises to do so. Check out this thread from over a year ago promising a new release.

http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?t=14196

 

John, we don't want to hear about how great Parallels 4.0 is going to be. We want to know why as paying customers we are getting the shaft with Parallels 3.0. We want to know why it is that we are not getting the features promised to us when we purchased Parallels 3.0. I purchased Parallels 3.0 as a pre-order because I trusted the Parallels team to deliver the features listed on their pre-release announcement here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070705025352/http://www.parallels.com/products/desktop/upgrade

Now many of these features are being rolled into Parallels 4.0 and all you can do is tell us how great a deal Parallels 4.0 is. I want the product that I paid for, not another $40 upgrade.

 

Nope. But I did purchase VMWare Fusion when it came out, and I've now converted and have been using that because I've been fed up with waiting for those particular features that were apparently due to come out in a free 3.x build to appear. I've not used version 3.0 for many months. A bloody great shame because I loved Parallels Server enough to persuade my former employers to buy it as it ran everything exceedingly well (and supported 64-bit virtualisation which is what we needed).

Unless a minor miracle happens and Parallels decides to make some changes to it's upgrade policy from 3.0 to 4.0 (because I could have just waited to upgrade from version 2 and paid the SAME price as version 3.0 users!!!) then I will not be buying the upgrades, nor can I recommend Parallels Server based on the conduct of Parallels staff about their statements on these forums.

M.