12.1 kills ram allocation >8gb for non PRO version?

Discussion in 'Installation and Configuration' started by MacSpanner, Nov 11, 2016.

  1. EWTHeckman

    EWTHeckman Bit Poster

    Messages:
    37
  2. BarryR

    BarryR Bit Poster

    Messages:
    14
    While I will capitulate that the Parallels Desktop Product for Mac is (and has been) an excellent product, it is readily apparent that Parallels Management is NOT. The terms "unethical", "conniving", and "disreputable" come to mind...

    1.) The Processor / Ram limitation did not exist in any version of Parallels I've purchased from Parallels v4.0 thru v10.0
    2.) I do not remember seeing the processor/ram limitation listed when I upgraded to Parallels 11.
    2.) The "Crippleware" implementation for processor/ram was NOT implemented in any version of Parallels 11 I ever used.
    3.) I do not remember seeing the processor/ram limitation listed when they solicited me recently to upgrade from Parallels 11 to Parallels 12.
    4.) The "Crippleware" implementation for processor/ram was NOT implemented in the v12 release version, or other Parallel 12 version updates, until the last update.

    It appears that Parallels has issues with Sr. Management and their "strategic" business models. The appearance is that it seems they WANT to get more revenue for Parallels Desktop that the market simply will not bear...and it appears that Parallels Management is aware of this fact. So they go to underhanded and disreputable tactics to try to increase revenue. If I was an investor in Parallels, I would be seriously pissed off at the ethics. It is NEVER "right" to attempt to take advantage of your most loyal customers. They will not remain loyal for long... Is the above accurate? I can't say...it is purely my speculation, but (that being said), it IS factually the perception Parallels is creating.

    I'm walking away after 8 years. Way to go Parallels!!!! You can bet I will be recommending the competition from now on. As I mentioned in a previous post, I took issue with their strategy previously when they released Parallels Access. In that case also the market would not bear the underhanded tactics, and they had to alter course. You would think that a reputable organization would learn from prior mistakes, but alas that is not the case with Parallels. Done with em!
     
    HywelJ and WiseHacker like this.
  3. JaredW1

    JaredW1 Bit Poster

    Messages:
    9
    I don't tweet so wasn't aware of that link, but now have found @ParallelsCares via google. I think they should rename it to @ParallelsDoesn'tCareOneBit.
     
  4. JaredW1

    JaredW1 Bit Poster

    Messages:
    9
  5. JaredW1

    JaredW1 Bit Poster

    Messages:
    9
    Yes they are throwing good will away. They won't even refund my upgrade to 12 if I subscribe to pro. I have previously paid for every update but unless they do something to make this better I can't see giving them a cent again. I was previously very happy with parallels but this isn't right. This information still doesn't show up on the front page comparison between versions so apparently they are going to continue to try and get people to buy the standard and then tell them they need to buy the subscription to pro as well if they want the additional memory and cpus.
    https://forum.parallels.com/threads...for-non-pro-version.338853/page-2#post-812912
     
    HywelJ likes this.
  6. HywelJ

    HywelJ Bit Poster

    Messages:
    3
    After the update (or downgrade) I was (and still am) seriously annoyed with this tactic by Parallels. Like many, the VM configuration I've used for years was suddenly unusable unless I paid extra to upgrade. This is an unethical and is ransomware. I ended up having to downgrade my VM and risk losing my data as I had open files when the VM was suspended.

    Its frustrating enough having to pay to upgrade every year for little benefit, but I only upgraded less that two months ago so o be faced with this is last straw. Like many others I will be looking to migrate across to another VM software product.

    :mad::mad::mad:
     
  7. chessdr

    chessdr Bit Poster

    Messages:
    2
    I've been using your Parallels product for running Windows on our macs for quite some time and have been very happy -- that is, until I upgraded to Version 12 as I am now running OS/X Sierra. After upgrading and starting up Parallels I got this ugly error message -- something about only a maximum of 8gb of RAM can be used on this VM. What? I upgraded from version 11 to 12 and now I am limited to 8gb? I'm sure it was in some small print about upgrading to 12 will limit you to 8gb. Really, Parallels? I spend another $49 and get half the product? I talked to your support desk and he reloaded version 11, and that limit is not there? Not real happy about this situation. What's the competition's name? VMWare?
     
    HywelJ likes this.
  8. patricek

    patricek Bit Poster

    Messages:
    9
    I just did the same...walk away after 8 years. I'm in violent agreement with all of your points (stated as much vehemently to Support over the past few days). Support staff and management just pointed to "pages 100 and 127" in the friggin' user manual after mentioning "a bug in the Standard Version on some mac desktops". Seriously? I just can't stomach dishonesty. You are "leasing" their product and they feel empowered to violate a sales agreement at will with every loophole they can find for a few more bucks.

    Shame - they have a decent product. VirtualBox has some bugs I can't live with. So I just installed VMWare Fusion. They import a Parallels Win10 vm just fine, but make sure you :
    - uninstall Parallell Tools first
    - "shutdown /s /t 0" a win10 vm
    - have enough disk space since Fusion will copy your Parallels vm into their own space
    - all BEFORE pulling the plug on Parallels

    I can now fully leverage my host machine's 32Gb and 8 cores again with my old win10 vm. My win10 dev environment is back up and running with some decent performance. No PRO version needed.

    Complain like hell and/or follow my lead , demand a refund ASAP and go elsewhere...They are a dishonest and sneaky bunch...

    || ParallesDoesNotCare!
     
    MarkM7, JoelB3, emiko and 1 other person like this.
  9. DaveE3

    DaveE3 Bit Poster

    Messages:
    2
    Got the nasty 8GB limitation message this AM. Thoroughly disgusted at this greedy anti-customer $$$ grab. Successfully reverted back to 12.02 and will switch to Fusion when the time comes. Had always recommended Parallels to friends or colleagues switching to Mac. Never again!
     
  10. JaredW1

    JaredW1 Bit Poster

    Messages:
    9
  11. emiko

    emiko Bit Poster

    Messages:
    37
    VMWare Fusion (64GB RAM, 16vCPU limit)
    [Links and 2 lines removed by Parallels]
    If you decided to stay on.
    http://www.downloadcrew.com/article/1067-parallels_desktop_for_mac
    (the last version of Parallels 12 which has no 8GB limit, grub it while you can)
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2016
    KentM2, patricek and HywelJ like this.
  12. jkwuc89

    jkwuc89 Bit Poster

    Messages:
    97
    IMHO...the right thing to do here is let impacted users upgrade to Pro for free for a limited time because allowing these features to work in standard was Parallels' fault, not the users.
     
    patricek likes this.
  13. PaulB11

    PaulB11

    Messages:
    1
    Thanks for the VMware Fusion link. I'm looking that direction now, this is just ridiculous.
     
    HywelJ likes this.
  14. Andrew@Parallels

    Andrew@Parallels Parallels Team

    Messages:
    643
    Dear Parallels Community,
    We appreciate you sharing your feedback on the recent update. While the quote above is still actual, let me try to explain what happened in different words. The limitations you started noticing with the recent update were always a part of Parallels Desktop 12 Standard Edition and it was documented in the product guides since version 11 release in August 2015. Unfortunately these limitations didn't come into effect until the latest update, as there was a minor issue in the product which made some of the Pro features available to Standard edition users. With this issue corrected, Standard edition now has standard set of features, and Pro has advanced functionality. Hope this explains what happened and why.
     
  15. Steve Reichenbach

    Steve Reichenbach Bit Poster

    Messages:
    17
    I just performed a minor update of Desktop 12 for Mac. Now, the software won't run, stating that there is a RAM limit. The support response is that they "fixed" the software by enforcing a heretofore unenforced limit. It is unacceptable to have purchased and used software for months and then have it be crippled by a minor update. Moreover, this limit isn't advertised in the product information (and the support response pointed to pp. 100 and 127 of the User's Guide). This is very bad customer treatment. Had I known that this unadvertised and unenforced limitation would later be sprung by surprise, I wouldn't have purchased the software. Others should know, that performing the most recent routine minor update will "fix" the software so it is crippled.
     
  16. Steve Reichenbach

    Steve Reichenbach Bit Poster

    Messages:
    17
    I wish I'd read this before updating. They wrote that this was a "fix", but it has crippled my software. Note that this limitation is not advertised, even in the comparison of versions. As you say, it is very bad customer relations to cripple software via a minor update. Unbelievable.
     
  17. MarkM7

    MarkM7 Bit Poster

    Messages:
    26
    I'm sorry - but what you have done is taken functionality away from us. This isn't acceptable !
     
    HywelJ, AlexH4 and JaredW1 like this.
  18. Steve Reichenbach

    Steve Reichenbach Bit Poster

    Messages:
    17
    Andrew writes: "The limitations ... were always a part of Parallels Desktop 12 Standard Edition", but clearly that is not the case because until today they were not. Moreover, even today, the main comparison page for the versions doesn't state this limitation of the Standard Edition. If this limitation had been advertised, I likely would have upgraded to the Pro Edition, but if Parallels thinks that having bought Parallels Desktop 12 Standard Edition (and having this experience of a minor release crippling the software) that I am now going to purchase the Pro Edition, they are delusional. I am a professor of computer science at a large university and have always sung the praises of Parallels, but now students here, many of whom use Macs, will hear of this underhanded action. Andrew, if you want to alienate long-time users and even proponents of your software, this is how you do it. If you want to do the right thing by your customers, you will offer refunds or upgrades to the Pro Edition.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2016
  19. Steve Reichenbach

    Steve Reichenbach Bit Poster

    Messages:
    17
  20. patricek

    patricek Bit Poster

    Messages:
    9
    Dear Parallels

    Let me try to explain in other terms. I won't go over the many details of why your whole upgrade approach smells like a sneaky, greedy and dishonest bait and switch. This thread has many expressive posts in that regard. Let me add a very REAL destructive scenario that added insult to injury.
    - Paralells entices us with an upgrade notice while the VM is live
    - we read the release notes (no mention of limitations) and proceed believing it's all good.
    - Parallels upgrades the app to 12.1, then a popup informs us that our configuration is now invalid with 4+cores and 8GB+.
    - It is a blocking popup. The only way out is a cold shutdown, as it suggests. Like unplugging our computers.
    - We lose data.

    There you go. After many Parallels support posts, not even an apology for that.

    The LEAST you should have done was offer a free PRO upgrade for existing customers while you figure out how to truly differentiate your product (and state so up front in your marketing material! User guide just doesn't cut it...) An 8GB limit for a modern OS is simply not acceptable even for a Standard edition. You're in the business you should know better. Some of us use OSes for more than just playing Solitaire. We also develop on them. It's no longer about the measly upgrade price (which most of us were entirely ready to pull the trigger on anyway), but really the principle of it all. Can we trust you?

    I would strongly recommend Support review their entire approach here. It is not customer friendly. You are actually affecting more of your loyal customers (8+ years here) then unsuspecting newbies. That's what stings the most.

    You guys are just plain wrong. Show you really care.

    EDIT: Other ideas on how to smoothen this "upgrade" process for others...

    - Don't allow live updates of your upgrade when you make such breaking changes
    - Give users a "grace period" while you differentiate your product. Maybe with a time limited upgrade to Pro.
    - Give users's very prominent notice of the new limitation(s)
    - Release parallel 12.0 point upgrades with your new fixes without affecting the core resources
    - Free or almost free upgrade to Pro for a limited time
    - Maybe extend the subscription period for those who have legitimate issues
    - Update your website and marketing material appropriately. Don't just bury your notice in the basement, down the hall, inside a bathroom stall...

    Any combination of the above will show you sympathize and are willing to go an extra mile to help your loyal customers. Your marketing department should have already thought of this ...
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2016
    HywelJ, JayG1, JefersonA and 3 others like this.

Share This Page