I posted a thread about observations and issues with 5.0 vs 6.0. It was NOT made available publicly because I made validated criticisms (in most cases) about 6.0. Why?
As someone currently evaluating a trial version of 6, I would have been very interested to hear any comparisons between the two. I hope your message eventually finds its way onto the board, if not, perhaps you should blog it somewhere and give us a link.
6.0 is 5.1 I'm not going to rewrite it. I had links, feature comparisons/evaluations/opinions/observations. I understand Parallels doesn't want negative things said, but I tried to be fair and state where my experience was unmeasured and subjective. I have purchased and used EVERY single release of Parallels and it is my favorite product overall. My advice, try the 6.0 demo thoroughly. MOST of the claims of the new release I found to be exaggerated or false or already in the 5.0 version. I explained in my post for those who think I'm a fanboy or a troll making unsubstantiated claims. Plus look at Fusion's 3.1 update which had (at least in numbers and claims) approximately the same scope of change and it was FREE to 3.0 users. 5.0 and 3.0 were released around the same time. Again I had links to both "What's new pages" for users to see. 6.0 is really 5.1. I think users are paying for updating the core tech of the hypervisor (note claims that somehow 64bit support means performance improvements???) and the features/performance and claims are really overstated. Parallels may be laying groundwork for future improvements but I argue they aren't realized in 6.0. That and the UI improvements are almost non-existent or small tweaks. I'd claim there is no significant "integration" changes using Coherence or Crystal other than the very welcome support of Spotlight integration for Windows apps. Compare for yourself. I'd update if I was using 4.0 or earlier. I wouldn't if I had tried the demo of 6.0 instead of just paying for the update without trying it first. But they will probably delete this too.
Thanks for this. I was using 4 so perhaps it is worth continuing, although I certainly am not seeing the 'faster boot' or the 'faster access to drives' that the hype mentions. I also object to the fact that now I have installed the trial version it seems to have deleted my version of 4 so don't know how to get back at the end of the trial! (I'm not a techie, I just want a simple, easy, efficient way to run my windows apps on my mac!). Anyway - thanks for your insights. The way this forum works with posts not appearing until they have been "checked" is very odd!
I believe there are performance improvements, but they are way, way overstated and not even noticeable in everyday use. For me startup and resume were SLOWER. I'd say it is worth an upgrade from 4.0.
One final note, when looking for answers for my observations this is what Parallels told me to do to find solutions. We strongly recommend to review Parallels Desktop documentation, check comprehensive Knowledgebase and participate in Forum discussions, to find solutions for known issues prior to contacting Parallels Support Team. I did exactly what they said and then they deleted the post. I am asking for a refund for the first time - although they make finding customer support almost impossible.
