paco.blasco said:
Are ou tell me that I had buy Parallels For Mac 6 months ago and I'm going to have less that one year support?
And are we testing their versions???
Absolutely we are testing their versions! This is a common practice with smaller software companies.
RealBasic does the exact same thing. They have a formal release version but anyone can sign up for the "beta" and have at it. They do ask that you submit reports on problems you encounter.
Parallels is doing the same thing. I found it very clear in both 3036 and 3106 that these were "beta" and NOT to be used in critical situations. I think that means CLEARLY that you use it at your own risk.
No one here is arguing that Parallels could do a MUCH better job with their support. Sometimes it seems like there is one guy, Andrew, who does ANY support at all. Submitting support requests is a joke.
But surprisingly if you stay in the "norm" Parallels seems to work just fine. The people here that seem to have problems are those that are either a) not careful with now they update. IE they don't backup prior, they update while a thousand other programs are running and they have not rebooted in a century, or b) those that feel a need to push the limits of what the product was designed for. IMHO this is the abiliity to use Parallels on a Bootcamp partition.
Guys like me that are careful, backup regularly (not just the VM but my entire MBP) and only do a Parallels "update" when I've not got a critical path to follow and I usually do it on another machine first to check it out. I've not had any problems. 3106 works great except for some desktop redraw issues in coherence mode.
I can see the desire to use Parallels with Bootcamp partitiions. You've put time into loading stuff on your partition and it would be nice to make use of it. To me it was going to be a bumpy road no matter what. I fully expected the Windows registration issues. I've known for a long time that Windows XP sort fo takes a HW snap shot and computes some numbers that represent that hardware. When those change it means to M$ that you are installing on another machine.
WinXP also tried to get smart so that if you installed it on machine A then moved your hard disk to machine B it could detect that and give you a hassle about registering again. This was put in to keep people from cloning a billion HD copies of WinXP.
So to me the ability to run Parallels on a previously installed BC partition was asking for trouble and from what I've read a number of you have had it. Had I been in charge of the process I think I would have forced a re-creation of the partition through Parallels to avoid all the registration problems. But then that would make it difficult for those of you that are out of registrations. M$ allows 2. After that they ask a zillion questions and sometimes will deny you a new code. Kinda chincy if you ask me. And it seems like there is no recourse either. You can't go somewhere and show your little halogram and get everything oked. What good is the stupid halogram then?
Perhaps the next version of WinXP should require computers to have a camera. For registration you have to hold up your halogram next to your face. It takes a digital image of you and your halogram and does some facial and pattern recognition. To reregister if you can get the same halogram and your face is the same you are good to go. But then everyone would worry about M$ having your picture on file.
Anyway that is off topic. In my opinion Parallels was very clear about what 3036 and 3106 were. Beta. Perhaps the term "beta" was used wrong. Perhaps they should have said "unstable test version. Install at your own risk!!!" Even still there are those of you that would have hosed yourself by installing prior to a critical meeting where you needed XP and others that would have screwed up BC and so on. It is the nature of numbers. It is bound to happen.
Lastly I think Parallels has provided me a great amount of value for the $49 per copy I spent. Easily worth double that when I compare it to stuff like Microsoft office and even the cost of WinXP.
When the next major upgrade comes and they want a few more $$ I'll gladly fork it over. The only thing I would ask that Parallels do is to make support really exist. They should have a two support systems. One free... This forum where a Parallels technician might eventually answer your question. The other is paid. You open a support ticket, give a visa card, and for $19.95 you get tech attention within a day via email and the support ticket system.
That way those of us that have a critical need can get some hand holding. Parallels would also do well to make use of members on this forum. Much like Borland did with their "team B" members years ago.
A "Team B" member was given a free copy of the product and free updates for their community service in helping to solve others problems on the bulletin board. It would be a cheap way for Parallels to grow their support staff. Periodically Parallels should distribute a list of common fixes to these people to keep them up to date.
What do you think Parallels? I'd volunteer to help.
Mark
) and what they want to see in expected feedback. That is to say, they provide prospective beta testers with a simple contract that defines what is expected in return for being given a beta copy of the product. There is no reason for that forum to be a public forum.