Without Parallels, I would not be on a Mac again as my main machine. For the last 5 years we've owned Macs in the house and used them for servers and other stuff in the house, but I had to use a PC for my main machine for Windows Mobile development. However there are a few issues for me and they have to do with speed. Parallels 1892 seemed to be the best build ever for me and right now I would like to go back. The main reason is speed. With every build *after* 1892, I have found that with the cache policy set to VM, the VM screams, but OS X is so slow even with 1.2GB of free RAM (I have 800MB allocated to Parallels) that trying to respond to an email is as slow as molasses. With the cache policy set to OS X, OS X is good (mostly), but the VM disk access is very slow. When I'm compiling apps, its twice as slow. Using 1892 it was a perfect balance. So that said, I'm looking at VMWare Fusion and while I prefer Parallels hypervisor and all that (I don't give a care about Cocoa vs QT because the UI is almost never used - I run the VM) there are a few things Parallels needs to keep me as a customer. 1) Speed. I need better disk speed. OK, that's it really. Yes, USB2 would be nice, but I rarely use that so for me its no big deal. Disk speed is what I need. Now I feel Parallels could fix this by allowing us to tweak the cache policy even more perhaps using a slider or something or even better - direct disk access. I feel that this may solve both issues. Let me partition my drive and put my Windows data on a real disk. Then no cache policy and no virtual disks to deal with. The first VM to give me that in a reliable app will have my future money.