I have been using build 1970, two standard VMs with Win XP Pro (no Bootcamp). One VM was cloned from the other after system install/activation and then they were used independently on two user accounts. I have upgraded to build 3186, opened VM1, reinstalled Parallels Tools, and closed VM1. Everything was ok. Then I opened VM2 and WinXP told me I have 3 days to activate it. I reinstalled Parallels Tools, but I still get the activation prompt. My question is: should I have uninstalled the old Parallels tools before the upgrade? Or is activation forced because the new release reports different hardware to the guest OS (e.g. a lower screen resolution in one of the accounts now results in a change of reported graphics card specs)? If so, then this is a serious caveat that should be described in some release notes, as it may force reactivation by design. I made copies of my VM folders under Library/Parallels before the upgrade. Can I safely uninstall Parallels or will that delete my machines? Thanks for any help, Maciej.
Similar problem I have a number of VM for different functions. One I use for testing new versions only which I updated with 3186. I was able to update only after overcoming the Black Screen issue previously reported. The next VM I tried (a copy since I am cautious) started up with no black screen but this time I got the following dialog box as window started up: --------------------------- Windows Product Activation --------------------------- Since Windows was first activated on this computer, the hardware on the computer has changed significantly. Due to these changes, Windows must be reactivated within 3 days. Do you want to reactivate Windows now? ---------------------------- Until a solution becomes apparent it makes sense to me and wait a while to update to 3186. i just don't want to update my collection of VMs or worse with four activations required to rebuild them to pass the Microsoft activation hurdle.
So you can have two versions of Parallels on the samoe computer and use different versions with different machines? That would partly solve my problem. A question to Parallels support people (if they are reading this at all): Could you confirm or deny that the new version of Parallels may be reporting a different hardware configuration than the previous release? Maciej.
