Ara,
I have used Parallels from day 1. It has improved a lot over the two
years. I consider it virtually seamless now. I have investigated
using Fusion recently, but It is not enticing me to change. It will
be a horse race between the companies. I will stick with what I have
until another gives me a compelling reason to change. If I were
unhappy with Parallels it would be a different story of course.
More below...
On Sep 6, 2008, at 1:52 PM, Ara Kaloustian wrote:
My wife had a copy of initial version of Parallels that was pretty
bad and at the time support was no better. She uninstalled Parallels
and started using BootCamp.
I understand Parallels is working fine now ... and Fusion has come
unto the seen and is also good... and would like to reconsider using
one of them.
Appreciate any feedback about Parallels and Fusion. Specifically
interested in their
1. Functionality
Parallels has more UI functionality than Fusion at present. However,
I *think* Fusion has some performance advantage with multiple cores,
but I am not sure. It would not help me at present though, so I will
investigate again when it is an issue. Of course, by then Parallels
could have it also. I think they do have it in their server product
at this point, but it is too new for me.
2. Ease of use
Parallels could not be easier. Just set the preferences the way you
want it to behave. Fusion is still a bit green.
3. Support
I never needed any.
4. Upgrade policies
I paid for version 1 and upgrade to version 3. Version 2 and all
point versions were free to me.
5. Amount of memory needed (currently have 2GB)
I run with 1GB for OS X and 1 GB for XP virtual machine on my 2GB
iMac. I run 2 and 2 on my 4GB Mac Pro --my main machine.
BR,
Dennis
