Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Parallels Desktop for Mac' started by veggiedude, May 31, 2007.
Thatâ€™s the best thing Iâ€™ve read all week.
According to MacObserver the release candidate is available to download now. I personally can't find it... anyone?
This is all that matters:
Everyone stay away from the Blue Kool-aid... There's some brainwashing going on. Corporate propaganda!
If the list of games is correct, some of them, such as the Alien Arena 2007 are Direct X 9 games, which would mean that it's quite likely Aero will be supported, and further that SWsoft Parallels 3.0 will be more advanced in this aspect than VMware's Fusion, which is currently in beta, but only doing Direct X 8.1 games (and no Aero).
I'm one of the first Parallels customers. I bought a pre- (reduced price) licence from them the first week it was announced. However I'm holding off until 3.0 is out and I can demo it as lately I've found myself more partial to Fusion. However if 3.0 is rock solid and does in fact supersede VMware in features and performance, then I will gladly pay $50 for an upgrade. Another reason I'm waiting is to see what Fusion will cost and what their final product will look like compared to Parallels 3.0.
The beta and release candidate versions are available only to approved beta testers. You can apply to become a beta tester by following the link in the support tab at the top of this page.
Did you read the linked article? The point is that it refers to the private testing period having ended and the RC being available.
I'm aware of the beta testing program.
Why would MacObserver suddenly be the fount of all knowledge on Parallels' product release schedule?
... and why would MacObserver be any less knowledgeable than the 'fountains' in this forum. The article doesn't read as speculative to me.
It's the only source that has reported a public RC. Nothing has been published by Parallels to say it exists, and I'd be more inclined to believe them than the wishful thinking of either the local fountains or of a solitary web columnist who likely put two and two together and made five.
the RC is available.. only to beta testers.. The "fountain of knowledge" is wrong in this case i'm afraid.
The beta testers and likely magazines, bloggers, and other industry wanks will have access. The article is correct, I was correct. You on the other hand read too much into what you saw in the article. You're not likely to be seeing a copy of the RC version if you are not among the chosen.
twynne, don't be pedantic. There is a beta programme, some of us are part of it and it seems each Friday there is an update. The latest was released today, I've installed it and am using it to reply to this thread.
Any 3.0 announcements have quite clearly been made to entice and excite users out there in lieu of a full rlease of 3.0.
I'M being pedantic?! How exactly do you figure when all I did was read an article and took it at face value. Excuse me for being enthusiastic and interested in trying the latest. All I seem to find in this forum is patronising attitudes.
As I posted in another thread, the point about the 'private' beta is that those of us (myself included) who have been loyal Parallels users since the first public test release weren't even informed that the beta testing had gone private.
Surely one of the main points of having a forum is to engage the users that are *interested* in the product and it's direction.
Normally I do not feel any pity for the Parallels team. I think the vast majority of their headaches are self induced. In this particular instance however, I don't think they can win no matter what they do. The previous set of Betas (for what is the current 2.5 release) were all public and almost every stinking person visiting their website downloaded the beta even though it was a beta. They then installed it, and BITCHED to the world when things didn't work right for their 'paid for' product. The fact they were using a beta instead of the older release version was 100% meaningless to them. Don't believe me? Go back through the forums. It is filled with thread after thread of people bitching things were not working correctly and they paid good money for the program. Of course the majority of these people were using a beta and not the release.
There was also mass confusion on the forums because all beta discussions were taking place in the regular forums. Many of the 'true' beta testers (those who understand it is a beta and it could bork their entire system) urged Parallels to make a set of beta only forums, and perhaps even make it a bit more difficult for people to inadvertently install the beta.
It seems you either did not know about the closed beta (it was mentioned by Andrew (I think it was Andrew) in the forums), and the support site has had a link for the beta sign up long before the beta actually started. If you missed it I'm sorry. If you did apply but were not chosen, that is how betas work. Not everyone gets the golden ticket.
On the bright side, you've also not had to worry about massive instability or productivity losses as the two programs cannot reside on the same system. Rumor has it that 3.0 also makes permanent changes to your VHDD which may or may not appeal to you either.
If you want to talk about frustrating ..... vmWare has been stuck on beta 3 for two months. It's a bloated slow moving program with wonky 3D support and it has not had an update to their beta build since April 5. Now **that's** frustrating.
BeOS on Parallels for Mac v3.0
Can anyone confirm if BeOS installs and runs on Parallels for Mac v 3.0?
my point was that they haven't done anything recently so they can hardly be an "innovative" company now seeing as they have sold almost everything to other companies.
i thought i read on the parallels 3.0 site that parallels 3.0 would not be billed to my credit card till it actually ships next week(presumeing we have all guessed correctly and they are indeed shipping on the 6th.) however i notice a charge for 39.99 for parallels showing on my account. is this just simply a verification check to see wheater or not the card is good? i know some companies do that but usually they charge like a doller or something ive never seen them charge the actual amount of the purchase before.
First of all, don't take any of this as "whining". I don't mind paying for software, I believe in supporting fellow software developers. Here is what I don't like.
I purchased this software back in February. I have been using this software fairly heavily since then. I have also been looking forward to the next version of Parallels (3.0). As I come to understand it, I will have to pay for it.
Now, here is the part which I'm not sure if I understand. Will Parallels continue support for v2 (or 2.5). Will they continue to release updates of this software, resolving the bugs for the version which many have paid for? If they cannot continue to do this, how do I know that if I purchase this version, in 6months I'll have some buggy unsupported software and be asked to shell out another $50 for an upgrade?
I'd like to see some sort of announcement on a release of the next build for our current version, then I'll consider upgrading.
Even Microsoft is still release Windows XP security / bug fixes =/
RE: The lame IBM argument
Heaven forbid I am caught defending IBM or engaging in this childish banter but you (macgeek21) really do need to do a google search--"most innovative companies" would probably do the trick--before letting your emotions dominate the picture. You wouldn't want to be seen insulting your fellow Mac users now would you?
that's Business Week's report.