Sounds like a good argument, but I woould only say that it's about
time that people start prefacing their questions about Fusion,
Parallels and Bootcamp with "I have an older machine running ...". if
it is indeed the case that they will be using an older system.
Generally people buying computers aren't looking to buy an older
modelin which case it makes sense to give information about current
machines.
On Feb 27, 2008, at 12:33 PM, David Poehlman wrote:
I think we agree but are talking at cross purposes. For instance, I
have
several systems. the lowest end intels I have are 2.0 systems. I
tried
putting fusion on one of them and it ran my system down. I would
say that
I'll have this system for several years and if someone bought the same
system when I did and that is the only system they have, they'll be
in that
boat for a while. Just because more power is here or on the way
does not
change the fact that must be made clear.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Grady" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS
X by
theblind" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: Boot camp vs Fusion vs Parrallels
That's like saying unless you have a car you can't drive 55 miles an
hour. Of course, it's rather obvious that if you don't have a
powerful enough machine then you might want to know that, but I think
you can safely assume that machines are getting more and more
powerful, and there aren't flocks of people buying older machines.
On Feb 27, 2008, at 9:10 AM, David Poehlman wrote:
unlessyou have a less powerful one and then it is well worth the
info.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Grady" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS
X by
theblind" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:28 PM
Subject: Re: Boot camp vs Fusion vs Parrallels
As powerfull and fast as processors are now-a-days that's hardly
worth
mentioning.
On Feb 26, 2008, at 12:51 PM, Cara Quinn wrote:
Actually one good reason to use BC is that with Fusion you are only
using one core of your processor to run each OS and with BC you're
using both cores with one OS.
Smiles,
CQ :)
On Feb 26, 2008, at 8:17 AM, Tim Grady wrote:
Works well here, and if for some reason I want to get rid of
Windows on my machine I just through it in the trash, no fooling
around with disk partitions.
On Feb 26, 2008, at 8:39 AM, David Poehlman wrote:
You are still open to nasties if you run a vm because you are
running
windows no matter what. Most of the problems I've seen with
windows on macs
are a result of vm.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Søren Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac
OS X by
theblind" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 8:28 AM
Subject: Re: Boot camp vs Fusion vs Parrallels
Why is Boodcamp best? Sorry, I don't agree.
1: If you use Fusion, you are stil working inside the Mac
operating
system. that means you have better security. If you use Bootcamp,
you
only have the security features in Windows, and you have opened
for
viruses and other things. I haven't tried Bootcamp, so I'm not
sure
about that. I read it in a forum.
2: You don't need sighted assistance in fusion to install Windows.
The
program does it automaticly.
---
View my Online Portfolio at:
http://www.onemodelplace.com/CaraQuinn
