Parallels 4 slow to access Host disk on Mac

Discussion in 'Windows Guest OS Discussion' started by WolfgangH, Jun 3, 2009.

  1. WolfgangH

    WolfgangH Bit Poster

    Messages:
    1
    I recently upgraded my Mac to OS X 10.5.7. After the upgrade I started having problems with my Parallels installation in that accessing the Host disk is taking forever. It eventually happens, but makes using Parallels impossible. The local disk is accessible with expected speed.

    Has anyone observed this behavior and knows a workaround or fix? Thanks a lot for any advice or thoughts.
     
  2. estrelnikov

    estrelnikov Parallels Support

    Messages:
    287
    Try reinstalling Parallels Desktop - use this image to uninstall and then reinstall the application. It won't affect your Windows/Linux installations in virtual machines anyhow.
     
  3. hmolen

    hmolen

    Messages:
    58
    I have a similar issue.
    New iMac, new Parallels 4.0 (3844, 408728) but it takes forever to "open"/"mount" the disks.
    Do I really have to uninstall/install it with exactly the same version ?
    Thanks,
    Hans.
     
  4. estrelnikov

    estrelnikov Parallels Support

    Messages:
    287
    Please try it, as far as I understood you have not reinstalled Parallels Desktop after 10.5.7 upgrade. Also try uninstalling MacFuse before you reinstall Parallels Desktop with Terminal command below:
    sudo /Library/Filesystems/fusefs.fs/Support/uninstall-macfuse-core.sh
     
  5. hmolen

    hmolen

    Messages:
    58
    Actually, I never had Parallels running as this is a brand new system.
    So, this is my first install on a 'virgin' iMac, after upgrading all the Appel s/w, including 10.5.7.
    After upgrading it all I installed software among which was Parallels.
    Hans.
     
  6. trimegistro

    trimegistro

    Messages:
    22
    Does anyone know if after doing the above steps is there a need to re register Windows (vista) again.
     
  7. BruceH

    BruceH

    Messages:
    4
    Is there some way I can optimize with a command line arg/config file option?

    Thought I'd find a solution to this problem while waiting for a fileOpen dialog to render, so far taking more than a minute. I know one might argue that this *could* be application specific but it's fairly common across Windows applications (not always a minute, sometimes 20 seconds and sometimes much less).

    My issue relates to opening both the host and guest disk.

    Is there some way I can optimize with a command line arg/config file option?

    I am using osx 10.5.7 and windows xp pro that has 18G free.

    Here are the config file entries that seem relevant to help answer the question:

    <AppVersion>4.0.3810</AppVersion>
    <Runtime>
    <ForegroundPriority>1</ForegroundPriority>
    <BackgroundPriority>1</BackgroundPriority>
    <DiskCachePolicy>1</DiskCachePolicy>
    <CloseAppOnShutdown>0</CloseAppOnShutdown>
    <DockIcon>0</DockIcon>
    <OsResolutionInFullScreen>0</OsResolutionInFullScreen>
    <UndoDisks>0</UndoDisks>
    <SafeMode>0</SafeMode>
    <SystemFlags></SystemFlags>
    <DisableAPIC>0</DisableAPIC>
    <OptimizePowerConsumptionMode>0</OptimizePowerConsumptionMode>
    <ShowBatteryStatus>1</ShowBatteryStatus>
    <Enabled>0</Enabled>
    <EnableAdaptiveHypervisor>1</EnableAdaptiveHypervisor>
    </Runtime>
    <Hdd>
    <Index>0</Index>
    <Enabled>1</Enabled>
    <Connected>1</Connected>
    <EmulatedType>1</EmulatedType>
    <SystemName>winxp.hdd</SystemName>
    <UserFriendlyName>winxp.hdd</UserFriendlyName>
    <Remote>0</Remote>
    <InterfaceType>0</InterfaceType>
    <StackIndex>0</StackIndex>
    <DiskType>1</DiskType>
    <Size>32000</Size>
    <SizeOnDisk>37383</SizeOnDisk>
    <Passthrough>0</Passthrough>
    <Splitted>0</Splitted>
    <DiskVersion>2</DiskVersion>
    </Hdd>

    I should say that parallels has been excellent aside from that and I think you get value for your money. I would buy it again.

    trimegistro: After upgrading to version 4, I did have to re-register with Microsoft (System has changed message). I was surprised by it and dreaded the potential phone call I thought I have to make to get it working. Thankfully no phone call needed.
     
  8. trimegistro

    trimegistro

    Messages:
    22
    Thanks Bruce, so are you saying the original Windows serial was still good...
     
  9. BruceH

    BruceH

    Messages:
    4
    The upgrade did require a validation

    After upgrading from Parallels 3 to 4, I did have to validate Windows with Microsoft. My serial# was okay but Windows reported that a material system change had occurred and Windows required validation just as you would have to do if you were doing a fresh install.

    At best it is just a click and the process is done over the internet but I have had that process fail with a message to call Microsoft. At worst, you have to call Microsoft and they could deny your request. That sort of treatment is indicative of how Microsoft views its customers and was a factor in my choice to try to stay platform neutral.

    To me, software, including operating systems are a commodity and the way Microsoft conducts business does not reward loyalty. I'm willing to pay for good software but I expect value in return. Microsoft has become much less relevant and out of touch with its customers needs, at least from my point of view.
     
  10. trimegistro

    trimegistro

    Messages:
    22
    Thanks for the details, the reason I ask is because my Vista copy is a OEM version therefore I can only get a total of 3 serials at the most and this would be my third and last...
     
  11. BahramS

    BahramS

    Messages:
    1
    I have the same problem as the previous posts

    When I installed the very original version of Parallels 4.0, which I bought around December 2008, the performance was great. However, with each updates Parallels has become progressively slower and slower. It now takes a few minutes to get things moving and open files in Windows XP.

    I've followed the previously posted instructions, but I don't see the performance that I used to have.

    Could you help?

    Thanks!
     

Share This Page