Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Choosing Parallels Over BootCamp for OS X

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the things-are-getting-all-tangly dept.

juusan writes "Sysadmin Jeremy Randall outlines his installation and impressions of Parallels for Mac OS X. Is it better than BootCamp? Does it run succesfully on a Mac Mini? Does it pass the scrutiny of a fairly picky system administrator? Yes indeed, on all counts."

2 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. I'll save you time by Golias · · Score: 5, Informative

    Everything TFA has to say.

    1. It works pretty good for a version-1 app.
    2. It doesn't work well with external USB drives.
    3. You get the occasional "beach ball" if you are running other apps on the OS X desktop and have only 1 GB of RAM.
    4. The author is "platform agnostic" and really, really wants you to know that.
    5. Rumors are flying that Apple might buy them and incorporate this into 10.5, but then again, maybe not.

    Everybody who read my summary instead of clicking the link just saved 5 minutes. If a few million of you did so, I just saved a whole bunch of of entire lives!

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    1. Re:I'll save you time by PatMouser · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've been running in for a few weeks now (Beta 6, RC1, RC2, and the final production version) and haven't had a problem with the external drive, but I'm using a LaCie d2 connected via my FW800 port, so it's a little zippier. :)

      It's a seriously cool product and right now with XP running Word 2003 with one document open, AVG, and the generic Windows XP crap top is showing anywhere from 11.7 to 13.0 percent cpu. That's on a 17" MBP with 2G RAM.