On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 20:38 -0800, Joe Sloan wrote: > Tom Patton wrote: > > It's been a year or two back, but Parallels was very stable for me. I > > see they've won several awards this year, perhaps it should be on your > > candidate list...? > > Just a war story, feel free to disregard - > > I checked out parallels, which I noticed was at version 3.0 for mac, and > only at version 2.2 for linux. It installed OK, but it made my otherwise > solid suse 10.3 machine quite unstable. It could not get through an > install of a guest OS - I tried xp and suse 9.3 more than once. Each > time the result was a system hang. I can only surmise that the kernel > modules inserted by parallels were bad mojo, so I gave up on parallels. > > I next tried vmware workstation, which in contrast was rock solid. I > played quake, listened to music and browsed the web as expee was > installing, and expee appeared to run perfectly after the install. > > Just some data points for your consideration. > > Joe Good to know, Joe. I was using it for XP on top of 9.3...but haven't needed it since back then. I was wondering why there was no chatter about it recently on the list...perhaps experiences such as yours is why...
BTW, after I wrote my post, I called another guy at work (a machead), and he said he moved from Parallels to VMware on his mac about 6 months ago... I also recall now that it would set the taint flag on the kernel, and made upgrades difficult. Such is life, I guess. Forget I mentioned it ;-) Tom -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
