I can't speak about Parallels as I've never tried it but I've been using VMware fusion for ages now and I love it, I've have redhat, win 2k / xp / vista / 7 on my MBP and all run fine, well as fine as windows can anyway. On 7 Apr 2011, at 15:57, Paul Howard wrote:
> With Virtualbox being pretty much useless right now on the new macbook pros > [1] I find myself in need of paid for virtualisation. > > Is there any consensus on which of the two is better? > > Will be using it mainly for a Windows VM (just for testing software) and > running a couple of Linux machines. I used Parallels a few years ago and it > seemed pretty decent but have used neither of the mac based products for ages. > > Not really bothered about coherence mode or any of that, just need the > fastest most stable one really. > > > [1] http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/8474 > > -- > Paul Howard > > web: phoward.com | twitter: @phowardcom > > tel (UK): +44 (0)1293 738158 | mobile (UK): +44 (0)7903 505153 | tel > (US) : +1 251 243 0058 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Sussex Mac User Group" group. > To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/smug?hl=en-GB. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sussex Mac User Group" group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/smug?hl=en-GB.
