Is it safe to upgrade to Leopard yet?

Discussion in 'Installation and Configuration of Parallels Desktop' started by jjfcpa@mindspring.com, Nov 12, 2007.

  1. jjfcpa@mindspring.com

    jjfcpa@mindspring.com Member

    Messages:
    45
    I'm running WinXP on a MBP and waiting for solid build of Parallels that will play nicely with Leopard. I've been waiting to upgrade because I can't afford down time ... literally none except for the time to upgrade to Leopard.

    So should I do it, or wait? I've had Leopard sitting on my desk now for a couple of weeks.

    I know VMWARE ran into some issues, but it appears that Fusion is playing nice with Leopard.
     
  2. mactivist

    mactivist Junior Member

    Messages:
    12
    I'm holding off until 10.5.1 is released and Parallels has specifically released an update that has been verified against 10.5.1. Until then I am sticking with Tiger.
     
  3. Eru Ithildur

    Eru Ithildur Forum Maven

    Messages:
    1,954
    Yep, don't run Leopard yet. What's the big rush anyway? If you had to install it that badly, you should have got it via the Developer's connection months ago.

    Give Leopard some time to mature, the experience will be a LOT better, also Parallels will have their stability issues sorted out too.

    I 'might' install with 5.1, but probably 5.2 or 5.3.
     
  4. James Bond 007

    James Bond 007 Hunter

    Messages:
    159
    Have not been here for quite some time, and it seems to me that Parallels still has not released a Leopard compatible version.

    So my answer is, if you must use Parallels, then no, stay with Tiger.

    If you use VMware Fusion (like me now. I was a Parallels user.) then you can run Leopard. Fusion 1.1 runs great under Leopard.

    [​IMG]
     
  5. kthacher

    kthacher Junior Member

    Messages:
    14
    Mr Bond,

    Are there any serious functionality/performance shortcomings in VMWare compared to Parallels in your opinion? Thanks in advance.
     
  6. gegervision

    gegervision Hunter

    Messages:
    185

    We should not asking questions here about VMWare's functionality with Leopard. Please go to their forums to discuss their products.

    As far as Leopard 10.5.1, the OS is rock solid, but we are still experiencing some stability issues with Coherence in 5540 which Parallels is working on. Single & Full Window modes works with out incident from what I can see.
     
  7. Khoji

    Khoji Member

    Messages:
    77
    Rubbish. If Parallels is better or worse than Fusion it's fine to discuss it here, it's a Parallels subject. It would be equally OK to compare the two products on the Fusion forums. If either of the companies can't take something like that they shouldn't be in the software business.
     
  8. FlatDog

    FlatDog Member

    Messages:
    43
    10.5.1 is out, but Parallels now runs worse than it did in 10.5.0 for me. :(
     
  9. mtoy

    mtoy Bit poster

    Messages:
    3
    I don't think it runs worse, the problem is that it doesn't run at all (in my case at least).

    I would love to hear comparisons between Parallels & Fusion. If you can't mention Fusion here, and let's say you couldn't mention Parallels there (hypothetically), just where would you have this conversation? Competition is good, and many people need to use their Mac/Windows setups today so please, bring it on.
     
  10. kthacher

    kthacher Junior Member

    Messages:
    14
    Geger - I think it's a valid question. I have paid for Parallels and have been a loyal customer until now, but I am unhappy with the Leopard problem. I am also unhappy that you have to go to the forums to find this stuff out. Parallels really should have a warning on their home page, given the severity of problem early adopters are seeing.

    The answers to the question may prevent me from dumping Parallels and switching. Do you work for Parallels or have moderator rights on this forum? If not, I would suggest you refrain from trying to censor discussion. Censoring will cause me to switch ASAP.
     
  11. FlatDog

    FlatDog Member

    Messages:
    43
    I'm mindfull that Leopard is new and has its own teething problems, and this makes things hard for Parallels. 10.5.1 was released yesterday, how can we expect Parallels to be fully tested and tweaked to work with the Leopard changes in one day? I'm not bashing Parallels at all, I want to help them work through the issues so we all get a great product. I'm sure Fusion is having the same challenges.

    I did install Fusion when I was running Tiger, and now I'm on Parallels. To be honest there isn't much difference that I've noticed. So far I prefer Parallels but I guess it is down to personal taste. Parallels has been out longer on the Mac but VMware have great experience on other platforms. There isn't much between them at the moment and there is no clear winner yet, maybe never will be. Competition is good and keeps the pressure on new features etc which all benefit us the consumers.
     
  12. Khoji

    Khoji Member

    Messages:
    77
    I've just spent some time on the Fusion forums and my conclusion was to download the current trial of Fusion. There are threads there that are just full of frustrated Parallels users who have switched and are now very happy. For the first time I encountered multiple people openly talking about the constant sudden crashes in Parallels (in which Windows and Parallels just disappear from the screen) which are getting worse and seem to be downplayed here. It appears that Fusion is already genuinely Leopard compatible, plays nicely with Boot Camp partititions and does not trash them (Parallels has destroyed mine three times), and above all is STABLE. In addition to this all the input from the Fusion team on the forums there is exemplary, compared to the rather reticent input here. Parallels support has got better recently, but it's still very very far away from being anything close to good, and they are just taking too long to deal with their very serious stability issues. If if the reports on Fusion's current performance by the seemingly satisfied users over there turn out to be true I will definitely be switching -- unless Parallels manages to produce an update with some very serious improvements over the next 30 days.
     
  13. FlatDog

    FlatDog Member

    Messages:
    43
    Interesting. I think I'll download the Fusion trial again and give it another go now I'm on Leopard.
     
  14. FlatDog

    FlatDog Member

    Messages:
    43
  15. mactivist

    mactivist Junior Member

    Messages:
    12
    Again, I'm waiting until Parallels releases a 10.5.1 *CERTIFIED* release. I work in the software business so I know how complex this stuff can be. Anyone who's already upgraded to Leopard that is dependent on Parallels is clearly an early adopter and there are caveats in doing so.

    I depend on Parallels to get my work done, so I'm holding off. I already invested in 2.0 and a 3.0 upgrade, so I'll just patiently wait for the engineers to release a QUALITY version. Last thing we need is something rushed by management afraid of looking bad in the blogosphere.

    Have a little patience or go back to Tiger if you need Windows so bad. I believe VMWare isn't all roses either, I understand they aren't as good as Parallels if you need 3D support, so neither product is perfect yet.
     
  16. chabig

    chabig Hunter

    Messages:
    133
    Parallels runs great for me. Not a single problem, and more reliable than in Tiger.
     
  17. Khoji

    Khoji Member

    Messages:
    77
    Agreed...but I'm still using Tiger and I have massive acknowledged stability problems in Parallels. That is why I'm now looking for an alternative. Every so often Parallels and the virtual machine will just disappear from the screen in a fraction of a second. Completely, just gone, as though they'd never been there. This issue has been confirmed by other users and by Parallels support and the best they have been able to suggest so far is "turn off sound support, maybe that will help". It doesn't. In addition to this Vista VMs crash out to a blue screen regularly while just sitting there doing nothing, with no programs loaded. Obviously, this is probably also a Vista issue, but a VM is supposed to provide a completely compatible virtual hardware environment, and it seems that Parallels doesn't.

    I've been cutting the Parallels team a lot of slack for a long time because I work in the software business myself and I do know how difficult these things are. I really, really wanted them to succeed. But I'm now coming around to the opinion that the Parallels developers have their priorities wrong. Virtual machine software is serious, heavy metal computing and they are much too interested in fluff and whizzbang bells and whistles that look good on feature lists, whilst apparently neglecting the solid foundations that are all that really matters. For example the insane automatic file associations between OSX and Windows VMs, which are activated by default and basically just create an unholy mess, particularly if you use a lot of VMs. Or the alleged decision to alter the Windows OS code to make it play nice with Parallels when accessing Boot Camp partitions in VMs, which, if true, is simply an unforgivable programming sin (I have read this in several places but can't confirm it myself -- however, the mess that is Windows after Parallels has set up VM access to Boot Camp makes me tend to believe it).

    You just need to know a small bit about how difficult virtualization is to understand how impressive what Parallels has achieved is. And that is exactly why I am now tending more towards VMWare and hoping that they have produced a more solid product -- I've been using their products on Windows machines for years and their stability has always been outstanding. I can't say the same for Parallels, but that doesn't mean they are bad programmers or a bad company. They just have less experience and they also seem to have chosen some unfortunate policies recently.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2007
  18. Laser_jock

    Laser_jock Member

    Messages:
    45
    I want to second Chabig's remarks. PD (5540) working fine under 10.5.1. No instability issues and no hiccups. I've run Word and most recently Matlab without any issues.

    Caveats:
    I exclusively run in windowed mode.
    My version of XP has no third party patches and 10.5.1 has very few (OpenMenu, DoubleCommand, Tex Distribution)
     
  19. jwjohnson99

    jwjohnson99 Member

    Messages:
    73
    I have been running both Parallels (5540) and Fusion (1.1 - not rc) on my MacBook Pro (purchased both). The Parallels installation is so much nicer. Coherence just works. Unity sometimes works. I've not had instability in Parallels since upgrading to Leopard 10.5.1. There were a lot of problems when first going to Leopard with both programs. To be fair I see plenty of people complaining about problems in both product's forums as well as the Apple Leopard forums. So much for "It Just Works!" I'm happy to have a stable platform once again, but getting there was just as complicated as any Windows upgrade I've ever done. Don't get me wrong, I'm keeping both my Macs, but I'm sticking with Parallels for now.
     
  20. James Bond 007

    James Bond 007 Hunter

    Messages:
    159
    I had been a user of Parallels 2.5 before on Tiger, and I was all set to upgrade to 3.0 when I saw the many problems that people have, and "features" such as SmartSelect that I neither need nor want (just my personal opinion). At that time VMware was offering a preorder offer of US$40 for Fusion and I immediately took it. I have been using VMware Workstation 5.5 and 6 on my Windows PC and they are very stable. So I thought VMware Fusion would also be. It did not disappoint.

    Fusion 1.0 already runs great under Tiger. Its support for OSes other than XP/Vista (such as Windows 98 and Ubuntu) is better than Parallels in my opinion (the mouse works in and out, for example). It also appears to be faster and more stable. Fusion 1.1 adds support for Leopard and runs great on it. In my opinion for Fusion there is pretty much no shortcomings compared to Parallels, except for the lack of "features" such as SmartSelect on Parallels which I think is a nuisance rather than a feature.

    One other important consideration for me is that I have setup a group of virtual machines under VMware Workstation on my PC, and they will just work (after upgrading VMware Tools) when run under VMware Fusion. This saves me a considerable amount of time.

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page