I'm sorry Parallels but Fusion is leaving you behind in the dust

I agree with you completely. But aside from those leaving parallels due to their lack of ability to carry out promises (or who can't get support when something goes wrong; seems the bugs happen to some, not others), I think that Parallels isn't finished just yet (though they DO need to wizen up to keep from shrinking). Reason: Fusion is buggy itself, and (in beta) lacks some basic things found in Parallels. For example, you can't access the start menu in Unity mode, and in Unity the windows slide below the dock. I tried opening a game that requires directx 6 (and I think xp came with directx 9?), and it crashed the virtual computer upon opening. In Parallels, it just quits the game. Also, Fusion can't just change the screen size when I resize the window, which is ANNOYING. So I think parallels is okay for the short run, but better wizen up.

 

In as much as I'd love to agree...

After reading this thread, I decided to download and test Fusion. My results are substantially different than most. My results are:

(1) Fusion starts and stops MUCH faster than Parallels - very nice.

(2) Fusion is slower in keyboard response and I had some issues with mouse clicking (to close program) moving cursor arrow to undesired part of screen... basically I click one place, and my mouse moves to another... hmmm... a bug.

(3) When running Beyond TV Link, both programs (Parallels and Fusion) are not DirectX 9 compatible, and start the directX software renderer as expected. This is very processor intensive. In Parallels, it runs very smoothly. In Fusion, it does not... it skips with video and audio.

(4) Fusion's version of "Coherence" is pretty nice. I'm not so sure that I would say it is better... but perhaps it is.

(5) A few times (Fusion), when I closed a program, the entire VM seemed to disappear, and once it even crashed. Not good for 45 minutes of testing - but it IS a RC.

I do not play games on my system, and haven't had many of the bugs that I have seen posted on this forum. I agree from what I've read that Parallels must do a better job of addressing the forums. However, I can not agree that Fusion is a better "cleaner" product yet. It may become a better product, but I don't see it yet.

My system:
Parallels Destop 3.0 for Mac, Build 4560
MacBook Pro 2.33ghz. 4 GB ram (yes, I know it only recognizes 3 GB). WinXP SP2. Bootcamp Partition. Linux VM/Ubunto 7.04 (Fast!)

It does seem that those using Bootcamp may have less issues - just a general observation of thread comments - nothing scientific.

I upgraded my ram to improve Parallels performance and it seems to have done the trick.

Although Parallels isn't perfect, I'd be cautious about panning their product. They need to be better at communicating. Please take a look at the Fusion forums - not all of their beta testers are happy campers either. They have good response time, for sure, but I can tell you from experience that their product isn't "there" yet either.

I would definitely tell any users that don't need DirectX to turn it off. The speed difference is enormous. I realize that many of you purchased the product due to DirectX support, and this is surely a let-down - but I don't find Fusion as a viable or superior option yet for this.

 

I think I agree with your tests, pkasin.

 

One more tentative vote for VMware...my (MBP w/3Gig) CPU usage is at 5-8% at idle as compared to parallels which sits at 13-15% all the time...and it does start twice as fast...and I can allocate all the ram I want (not just 1.5 gig)...and...well you get the point. I'm keeping both for now because OpenGL is necessary for running Solidworks and Parallels is first to the plate with it even if it is a bit buggy at this point.

 

While I have not had the problems, I did purchase VMWare to keep my options open.

I have to believe that someday I'll run into a killer problem and Parallels (as they have done consistently) will be unavailable for support.

Parallel's current trend does not give one that uses it for business a good feeling about being able to rely upon them.

I remember a post a while back about how they were laying on TONS of support people. Well I sure have not seen a change. The forums are devoid of all but a few Parallels people.

I wonder if SWSoft is slapping the hands of those that do help "because it is taking away from new product development time"? I worked for a company like that once and it was hideous. We were actually told to ignore any customer that our manager had not directly assigned us to work with or look after.

If you did answer a question some high up mucky-muck would edit your post and say: "the views submitted by this individual while an employee of XXX do not represent the standard support methods of company XXX. Use this information at your own risk"

One last question... How does VMware run vista? Is it any better/faster than Parallels?

 

Remember, Fusion is only a RC1.

Who says that it was prefect?

However it's better than Parallels 3.0 as a whole. Also VMware Fusion is much better company than this Mickey Mouse outfit.

 

That seems to have been your implication. If you really feel that VMWare Fusion is better you should take all things into consideration and write a proper comparison. Otherwise you are just saying VMWare is much better, implying there are no problems with it. There are some who will have really bad issues with VMWare Fusion as well, and I can guarantee you will hear more from them once the final version of Fusion 1.0 is released.

On a side note, did you switch because of the issues you were having with Parallels not remembering the window size? One thing that you might want to know is that it is very unlikely to even be a Parallels problem because from what I can tell the window size is stored in the Windows registry. Therefore the issue you were having is probably a Windows registry corruption issue, which Parallels has nothing to do with.

 

I did, just read my original post. I don't have time to repeat myself.

No, I'm having trouble of the Parallels' interface window ITSELF not remembering its size. It has nothing to do with any Windows resolutions.

Again I gave three reasons why I'm fed up with Parallels in this thread. If you don't remember them, I suggest that you re-read them. Again, I'm not repeating myself.

 

Unless you are the only game in town (they're not) then customer service can make or break it. For me they're not making it in that department.

When I first installed & started up Parallels, I thought, gee, I can't imagine why everyone doesn't have a Mac now, because you have both computers! But after trying to use it, and having been entirely unsuccessful at printing, spending countless hours tweaking and playing with things trying to make my Mac work, I realize that no true Mac user would ever stand for this. This headache is reserved for Windows users that are accustomed to these kinds of problems.

Not only have I spent $80 on what amounts to a piece of beta software (PD 3.0), but I'm sure Apple would want to stay far away from this, at least in its current state.

 

Many settings for Parallels Tools are stored in the registry. That most likely includes the window size that is supposed to be returned to when switching from full screen to windowed mode.

You're fed up with Parallels? Well I'm fed up with the support forums being littered with unhelpful Parallels bashing posts which make it less likely that legitimate support requests will be found and addressed. Perhaps there should be a forum for general virtualization discussion so all these posts can be moved there.

 

Ah, now we know why Parallels isn't making substantive responses to the increasing frustrations of users, despite their large, well trained and deeply concerned tech support team: users are getting too frustrated!

Maybe that's also why the latest release is so buggy.

 

Replacing Parallels with Fusion

Hi I purchased parallels in March at the same time as i left the Windows environment and converted to a macbook pro.

I have recently purchased the upgrade of parallels which i wasn't too pleased about because i expected an upgrade to be fee, but i went ahead because parrallels seemed to be unstable and i thought the upgrade will improve it.

I was wrong and now after two purchases i am interested in scrapping parallels having learnt a valuable lesson and moving over to Fusion.

This next bit may seem a bit basic but I appreciaite any help.

If I install fusion in addition to parallels just to try it, will Fusion be able to run windows which is on my Macbook through parallels or will I have to install windows again within Fusion?

Thanks in anticipation
Dave

 

Hi,

You cannot resuse your Parallels VM with Fusion but you can convert it to Fusion :

http://www.vmware.com/community/thread.jspa?threadID=88195

The other solution is to reinstall XP in a Fusion VM

 

If I had seen a tendency of Parallels to actually address legitimate support requests in the past I would agree with you. But it seems that Parallels goes dead periodically and now is one of those times.

 

I am dissapointed in the support that I have not received from parallels. I downloaded the fusion product from vmware. It's Great!!!!! Sorry I every purchased parallels in the first place. VMWare is a great company that totally supports thier customers in a real time fashion. The product is easy to install and it just works. Steve, Thanks for the posts.

 

After reading this thread I downloaded the Fusion Beta and gave it a try. I liked many things about it but it caused several kernel panics on my MBP. Parallels has been solid for me. For now, I'll stay with parallels. I'll give fusion another look down the road when it comes out as a final release.

 

It may be needed to uninstall Parallels and reboot the Mac so that any kernel modules are properly unloaded. Parallels will crash Fusion if Fusion is already running when Parallels is started.

 

Using myself as an example of how Fusion and Parallels differ, my post count in these forums is over 1300. These posts include discussions and attempts to help people get this thing working for them. My contribution on the Fusion BBS is probably less than 15 and many were questions I had about the product. Fusion is so solid there's just not much to respond to. It just works, as you say.

 

Being myself a longterm user of VMware products (ESX VI, VMware on Win and Linux), I can say their products really work well. The only time I needed technical assistance for a big problem with one of the ESX servers, I got an answer within 4 hours with the correct solution (only basic email maintenance contract).

Check their updates and you can see that they release some minor bugfix versions for major releases with only limited new features ... their focus primarly is targeted to stability and not too much on eyecandy features.

 

My experience with Parallels has been good so far. I use it mainly with Visual Studio to develop plugin and XTensions for desktop publishing market.
Anyway, I have to admit there are some annoying problems that shoul be fixed before to go to impement new features with the risk, because of current Parallels' behaviour, to increase the bugs lista and complaints from customers.
Sure it is good for us to have more companies to compete and I hope all of them will be able to stay in the market and continue to rival each other.

Bye

Luca