I have upgraded from Version 10 to Version 16 for my new i7 32GB Mac mini, and of course I was not realizing that now Standard version is now artificially limited to 4 vCPUs and 8 GB ram. This is ridiculous since Version 10 I was upgrading from had no such limitations. I would understand if you set the limit for Pro version at Pro levels, so 8 vCPUs and 32 GB RAM, but going calling anything above 4 vCPU and 8 GB a "Pro" version in 2020 is a serious exaggeration.
More than 4 CPU/8GB in Standard Version
- Thread starter Nemensi
- Start date
AdefolajuA
Bit poster
Hello, just wanna ask a question. Do one pay the same amount of money yearly after the first purchase of parallel desktop software?
Since Paralles is giving up on us, give up on Paralles and use VirtualBox instead. It's free and has no limitation other than your host computer's physical limitations. If you want to use all of your computer's RAM, it'll let you.
You just need to find your own copy of Windows, but there are legitimate free developer/tester versions available out there. It's not hard to find.
You just need to find your own copy of Windows, but there are legitimate free developer/tester versions available out there. It's not hard to find.
FYI VMware Fusion Player is now free for personal use too and has absolutely no vCPU or RAM limitations, overall I like Parallels UI more and Windows seems to be snappier under Parallels, but the 4 vCPU and 8 GB limitation is just a grim joke in 2020. I'd understand that if the Standard license was free or max $19 and there was no free VMware Fusion Player, but I have paid $49 for upgrade from PD 10 that had no vCPU and RAM limitations, just to learn that my newly upgraded version is crippled "Standard" version.
This is HORRIFIC, Parallels Standard $79.99 or $49.99 with 4CPU/8GB limitation. While VMware Fusion Player FREE with no limitation on both CPU/RAM. What exactly is your marketing strategy? do you still believe in 2020 any decent app run with 8GM RAM and we pay $79.99 for this crap? This request was posted in 2017 and action on this reflects your commitment and marketing strategy.
Well, this thread has been around for a while. So I'm investigating VM's because my favourite game is stopping MacOS support and I have not been able to make bootcamp work with my EGPU. Here is the trick. There is barely any use for a Windows 10 PC with 8Gb memory and 4 cores. I can't think of a time in the last 5 years when any sane person thought that those were useful specs except to read email, surf the web and consume Netflix (especially on my favourite bloatware Windoze)
It seems obvious that the Standard software is only there as a marketing ploy to force the purchase of a pay to play subscription. It was very shoddy that people in the past have payed for an upgrade and actually had their functionality cut to the useless 8/4 combo. Let me say that I've dumped every software package that has gone the subscription way, and found some better software along the way (Bye-bye Photoshop, welcome Affinity Photo). Subscription only works for businesses as it helps them better manage their IT budgets. It is not value for money for ordinary people who have occasional need of software.
The only way to affect these decisions is to vote with your feet. However, the fact that this thread is so old and only 3 pages long shows you that most of the herd prefer to stick with what they know, even when they are being stiffed. And, from what I read, and my initial experiences of testing various VM solutions, Parallels seems to still have the edge on performance, so if I want that extra 5% bang for my bucks, I may have no choice. When you think about it, it is about the price of a cup of coffee every 2 weeks, compared to the many thousand of pounds I paid for my fruity computer. Not a great deal to shell out, especially if The Parallels VM SW is ready to go the minute the next version of MacOS is out the door. I'll be waiting to see how quickly they respond to the post 'Big Sur' world.
Software houses have to make money, they are not charities, but they also need a user base that feel they are getting value for money. It would seem that not enough people are voting with their feet, ergo, they are happy enough to splurge, so the subscription based business model survives. The comparison with VMWare is not valid, they have a different business model with a large portfolio of professional software. They can afford to give away VMware Fusion Player for free for non-commercial use, it is good advertising and probably a extremely small part of their user base. You can be sure they are doing this for good commercial reasons, not out of the goodness of their hearts (and the commercial version is more expensive than Parallels Pro, at least in the UK).
It seems obvious that the Standard software is only there as a marketing ploy to force the purchase of a pay to play subscription. It was very shoddy that people in the past have payed for an upgrade and actually had their functionality cut to the useless 8/4 combo. Let me say that I've dumped every software package that has gone the subscription way, and found some better software along the way (Bye-bye Photoshop, welcome Affinity Photo). Subscription only works for businesses as it helps them better manage their IT budgets. It is not value for money for ordinary people who have occasional need of software.
The only way to affect these decisions is to vote with your feet. However, the fact that this thread is so old and only 3 pages long shows you that most of the herd prefer to stick with what they know, even when they are being stiffed. And, from what I read, and my initial experiences of testing various VM solutions, Parallels seems to still have the edge on performance, so if I want that extra 5% bang for my bucks, I may have no choice. When you think about it, it is about the price of a cup of coffee every 2 weeks, compared to the many thousand of pounds I paid for my fruity computer. Not a great deal to shell out, especially if The Parallels VM SW is ready to go the minute the next version of MacOS is out the door. I'll be waiting to see how quickly they respond to the post 'Big Sur' world.
Software houses have to make money, they are not charities, but they also need a user base that feel they are getting value for money. It would seem that not enough people are voting with their feet, ergo, they are happy enough to splurge, so the subscription based business model survives. The comparison with VMWare is not valid, they have a different business model with a large portfolio of professional software. They can afford to give away VMware Fusion Player for free for non-commercial use, it is good advertising and probably a extremely small part of their user base. You can be sure they are doing this for good commercial reasons, not out of the goodness of their hearts (and the commercial version is more expensive than Parallels Pro, at least in the UK).
Parallels makes their money on one thing: making virtualisation on Mac "Apple user" friendly. If you're not a user but a super user/administrator and you need power, you can use their offering: more memory, more CPU's, Virtualisation in virtualisation in their business Edition. Parallels User edition has many nice features VMWare does not have because their product is build on a code base that serves virtual workstations in companies, so who cares about energy efficiency?
I can only say: try VMWare fusion player (its free) and decide for your self. Both serve different audiences and both have their strong and weak points.
I can only say: try VMWare fusion player (its free) and decide for your self. Both serve different audiences and both have their strong and weak points.
Wanderglobe
Bit poster
Same issue as everyone else. I decided to upgrade from an older version and imagine my surprise when my 16 GBs of RAM dropped to 8. I work in IT so it's no big deal to move to another VM but man, what an awful business decision! Crippling your software to push people to a higher end product? Who thought this one up? And who only uses 8GBs of RAM. A lot of us are doing more than just tooling around Facebook all day.
BenjaminN5
Bit poster
16GB standard 32GB maximum
It's 2021, windows sucks memory, fact in life.
8GB is a joke!
It's 2021, windows sucks memory, fact in life.
8GB is a joke!
I can only double this request.
I use maxed out systems. VMWare on my MacPro with 28 cores and 128G of RAM. I do software development in a VM and waiting 5 minutes or 20minutes for a full compile makes a BIG difference. On the MacBook Pro with M1Max however I have 10 cores available but I can not use them? and after 8G of RAM it stops?? what kind of limitation is this.
Note: I will NEVER buy a subscription because I buy when I have the need and the money to buy an upgrade. I need to _OWN_ the software, not _LEASE_. Otherwise in 5 years when I have to fix a bug in a very old version, I can't do it because the software is no longer under maintenance and has moved on to a much much never OS version , CPU etc and I would be stuck. This can never happen. Sometimes there's good reasons to stay on older version. The subscription model really doesn't work for professional software developers.
But as usual with Parallels... they rarely care about their customers. My 35 Licenses of Parallels Server for Mac where totally wasted (back in 2011...) as they dropped supporting their most valuable customer a few months later.
So I'm waiting VMWare to come up with an ARM version and then I'm gone. In the meantime I can use QEMU or UTM....
I use maxed out systems. VMWare on my MacPro with 28 cores and 128G of RAM. I do software development in a VM and waiting 5 minutes or 20minutes for a full compile makes a BIG difference. On the MacBook Pro with M1Max however I have 10 cores available but I can not use them? and after 8G of RAM it stops?? what kind of limitation is this.
Note: I will NEVER buy a subscription because I buy when I have the need and the money to buy an upgrade. I need to _OWN_ the software, not _LEASE_. Otherwise in 5 years when I have to fix a bug in a very old version, I can't do it because the software is no longer under maintenance and has moved on to a much much never OS version , CPU etc and I would be stuck. This can never happen. Sometimes there's good reasons to stay on older version. The subscription model really doesn't work for professional software developers.
But as usual with Parallels... they rarely care about their customers. My 35 Licenses of Parallels Server for Mac where totally wasted (back in 2011...) as they dropped supporting their most valuable customer a few months later.
So I'm waiting VMWare to come up with an ARM version and then I'm gone. In the meantime I can use QEMU or UTM....
Let me tell you something that you already know - nobody, NOBODY likes subscription licenses. Ever since the clowns at Adobe did it a few years back, every other developer with remotely useful software has decided that this should be the new standard. I have not upgraded and stopped purchasing adobe's CS since CS6 when they went to subscription. Subscriptions just give developers an excuse to release mediocre "upgrade" after mediocre upgrade since you don't actually have to fix anything or develop some new feature or tool that your users will want and therefore upgrade and boost your sales. As for parallels, I will NEVER purchase your software as a subscription. Decades ago good software was expensive. Now it has to be cheap because people don't want to spend, and user expectations had to drop sharply, as I see it. The same is certainly true for macOS.
I have upgraded from Version 10 to Version 16 for my new i7 32GB Mac mini, and of course I was not realizing that now Standard version is now artificially limited to 4 vCPUs and 8 GB ram.
I have upgraded from Version 10 to Version 16 for my new i7 32GB Mac mini, and of course I was not realizing that now Standard version is now artificially limited to 4 vCPUs and 8 GB ram.
It's been a good, long run, but the end may be sight for the supremacy of DDR4 RAM, the kind of system memory that powers most consumer PCs these days. That said, we're certainly not holding back on our PC builds and upgrades to wait for the impending DDR5.
You have a product, it turns out that you found success because there was a need. You have now fallen into the trap of so many other developers and gotten greedy. Let me tell you something that you already know - nobody, NOBODY likes subscription licenses. Ever since the clowns at Adobe did it a few years back, every other developer with remotely useful software has decided that this should be the new standard.
I don't want to be repeatedly nagged about omegleshagle installing the "Parallels Toolbox", and I don't want cloud backup for a year. Keep that junk, focus on the stuff that used to work, and drop the hardware restrictions. As it stands, I won't be renewing/upgrading/subscribing (whatever) my current license. Incidentally VMWare (based on compatibility tables) apparently supports running an El Capitan guest under a Mavericks host, which is just now about to become critical for me, and will kind of shoot in the foot any continued use of Parallels for a Mac guest OS.
You have a product, it turns out that you found success because there was a need. You have now fallen into the trap of so many other developers and gotten greedy. Let me tell you something that you already know - nobody, NOBODY likes subscription licenses. Ever since the clowns at Adobe did it a few years back, every other developer with remotely useful software has decided that this should be the new standard.
I don't want to be repeatedly nagged about omegleshagle installing the "Parallels Toolbox", and I don't want cloud backup for a year. Keep that junk, focus on the stuff that used to work, and drop the hardware restrictions. As it stands, I won't be renewing/upgrading/subscribing (whatever) my current license. Incidentally VMWare (based on compatibility tables) apparently supports running an El Capitan guest under a Mavericks host, which is just now about to become critical for me, and will kind of shoot in the foot any continued use of Parallels for a Mac guest OS.
The completely artificial restriction on the Standard version of Parallels Desktop limiting VMs to 4 CPUs and 8 GB of RAM is an absolute joke. 8GB. Seriously. In 2021!? Holding the performance of your customer's applications hostage in the hopes they will pay you even more money for a Pro license just so they can take full advantage of their hardware is indefensible, especially considering the FREE offerings of your competition. I like your software, but these kinds of artificial restrictions are ripe with the stink of customer-hostile business practices and desperation. You can do better.
I recently buy Parallels 17 and i think it will be the minimum to adding more ram and cpu... I don't wan't to buy a Parallels Desktop Pro, i don't need 128Go of ram ! I have a MacBook Pro M1 Max with 10 CPU and 32Go Ram... And i can't use them !!! Pro is for Pro and 16Go or 32Go is a minimum in 2021/2022... Same for CPU...
In my experience VirtualBox is more trouble than money saved, but VMware Fusion has no CPU/memory limitations and is quite reasonable, not as slick as Parallels but good enough. After more than a decade of regular (but NOT annual) Parallels license upgrades, I'm jumping ship. 8GB is laughable, and like others here a subscription model is a no-go for me.
David MC
Member
@GampaA@Parallels you said "The additional Virtual Machine ram will be available on Parallels Desktop Pro edition not in Parallels Desktop standard".
Does this apply to CPUs as well? If so, then why am i only able to pick max 8 CPU in my 10 CPU mac (it is an M1) ?
Does this apply to CPUs as well? If so, then why am i only able to pick max 8 CPU in my 10 CPU mac (it is an M1) ?
