I've been reading the threads and 3036 looks like it has a LOT of promise, can't wait for a more stable build. Most of the issues I've been reading seem centered around using the boot camp partition for Parallels instead of the hd image. My question is why? Why is using boot camp preferable to the image? I've been using Parallels for months now with zero problems because of the image, and performance is nearly as good as native...better in fact because the mouse driver in boot camp just can't be adjusted to my preference. With drag and drop in the new build, a webex fix, and coherence among many other things, can someone give me a good reason why I should switch to using the boot camp partition instead of my "well seasoned" image? Mark
The idea is if you started by using Boot Camp but find you don't need it as much anymore, or maybe you want to transfer stuff between that partition and your Mac, this will make it much easier. There are a lot of people who got their new Intel Macs, set up Boot Camp, and then discovered Parallels as an easier and more integrated solution to running Windoze stuff. But what to do with that old partition? Since Apple is promoting Boot Camp, and it looks to be part of Leopard, there may be a lot of switchers who start off with that. This new feature in Parallels will make it much easier for those people to switch from BC to Parallels. For those of us who never set up BC, it doesn't do much for us. Nice to know it's there though.
I was at the Apple Store the other day at the Genius Bar and they told me that unless I was interested in running games, just use Parallels. Last weekend, I set up Boot Camp again and tried to use Parallels Desktop to no avail. I may try again when that part is de-bugged. The Coherence feature works very well for me.
There are a lot of reasons. None may apply to how you use your computer. For people doing any work with digital media (3D, digital audio recording, intensive photoshop/paint work) or large database/programming work, Parallels is a brilliant solution for using tools across both platforms. There are times though when certain programs flat out won't run because they require 3D support or access to audio hardware and moving the data files around between two instances of Windows is a pain. Not to mention having to maintain those two Windows instances. Also, there are lots of times I find myself booting over to work full-screen. Parallels (similar to VMWare) uses a very low-grade graphics driver. At very high-resolutions there's lag on the screen and mouse which can be fatiguing when you are working 18 hours a day. And the driver does not have enough memory to support 32-bit color at very high-resolutions (like 2560x1600). Compared to previous products that perform emulation, Parallels is a quantum leap, but there are still a lot of high-performance computing scenarios where it makes sense.
Thanks for the replys. Maybe I should be more specific. I'm wondering specifically why you would use the boot camp partition as the drive for a Parallels VM instead of the image file. I can certainly understand the benefits to "going native" and booting directly into Windows via boot camp - I do it myself currently for Webex...but hopefully that won't be necessary in the future. But since Parallels does not yet support things like 3D video, directx, etc., it would seem that going native is still the solution, not using the native partition as a Parallels drive. So I'm still wondering, why use the partition in Parallels, other than creating a path for existing boot camp users to use Parallels? I suppose it makes sense for them because they gain the benefit of no reboots, but for anyone using the image it just doesn't make sense to me. Mark
It boils down to: 1) You only have to maintain a single version of Windows 2) You can reboot and use the exact same configuration, tools, and files without having to move data around, etc. For example: you have a database with millions of records. You'd lose a lot of time exporting/reloading it into another version of SQL Server every time you wanted to access it in Boot Camp. It's really about saving time, maintaining one copy of Windows and workflow. That help?
It would help more if you could actually use either Parallels OR Boot Camp at will, but until the activation issues are fixed, you're still locked in to using just one.
Makes sense, I appreciate it. For me, as primarily a business user, the boot camp partition doesn't make a lot of sense unless I was starting completely over.
The activation issues are only an issue if you are using a boxed copy of XP. If you are using a corporate activation key, there are not any issues.
Correct, but not every one here can get their hands on the Corporate version of Windows XP. So this reactivation issue will be a problem for them.
Is it possible to move a Parallels setup to a Bootcamp partition? I started out with Parallels, but see reason why I'd like to use Bootcamp on occassion, but don't want to do another setup and lose the hard disk space.
