Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Parallels Beta Adds Boot Camp, Desktop

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the stuff-to-play-with dept.

Verunks writes "Parallels has released a new beta of its virtualization product for Mac OS X. This new release includes one major new feature, something Parallels calls Coherency: "Shows Windows applications as if they were Mac ones. Try it and enjoy best of both worlds truly at the same time. No more switching between Windows to Mac OS." Check out this Screenshot" More interesting to me is the Boot Camp support so you can have a single partition to run IE7 in Parallels to test compatibility of a website but reboot to play video games that need a little more juice.

14 of 244 comments (clear)

  1. Incidentally... by BluhDeBluh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been wondering why a Linux distro doesn't do this automagically with WINE. It seems like such an obvious feature to implement, and would be great for people new to Linux or even those whose who don't know how to use it if it just ran as if native...

    1. Re:Incidentally... by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 5, Insightful
      i've done this about three times already and I'm afraid it'll just stop allowing me to reactivate it (even though it's a legitimate license)

      So you have a bought and paid for copy of Windows and they've made you afraid to use it. Seems like there's a moral in there somewhere.

  2. I Should Write Native Mac Apps...Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For charity?
    Out of good will?
    Because of indignant responses from hardcore Mac fans?

    Maintaining a separate Cocoa code base for a product, buy and support expensive Mac hardware, maintain Mac software engineers

    or let Mac users run our app from Parallels...

    1. Re:I Should Write Native Mac Apps...Why? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      or let Mac users run our app from Parallels... Good luck with that. As a Mac user, there is no way I would buy an app that didn't integrate properly with the rest of my desktop, much less one that required parallels. Unless you wanted to bundle the $80 Parallels license and the $100 Windows license with your app, of course...
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:I Should Write Native Mac Apps...Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mod parent up.

      I have this very dilemma with Quicken. I just bought a MacBook and let me tell you: Quicken '07 Mac sucks ass. Way short on just about every feature that the Windows version offers.

      So I have to ask them: how could they possibly have such disparate code bases? What are they thinking? The Mac version doesn't even read PC files. That's something even Microsoft was able to fix with their Office products 10+ years ago.

      So if I want them to get the hint at all, my only option is to pirate the Window version. Paying for the Windows version only gives them more reason to maintain the shoddy product that is their Mac version. Or discontinue it.

    3. Re:I Should Write Native Mac Apps...Why? by divisionbyzero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uh, because you think it is the best environment in which to develop? Other than the market share of the platform that's the only other relevant consideration. It may actually make Apple work harder to make Cocoa more appealing.

      P.S. You also lose points for having zero originality. This argument is ancient and all of the trade-offs are well known.

    4. Re:I Should Write Native Mac Apps...Why? by idiot900 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      or let Mac users run our app from Parallels... Not this Mac user. I bought a Mac because I like the way a Mac works. To use your app, I'd have buy a copy of Windows and a copy of Parallels, and then run them - and some people think the Java VM is bloated! And I'd have to deal with the Windows app not being well integrated with the rest of the system. The only way this will work is if there is no serious competition in your market segment.
    5. Re:I Should Write Native Mac Apps...Why? by jeffbax · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, the fact that as a Mac user there is no way in hell I would ever buy software for the sole purpose in running it in Virtualization - maybe that might be a reason.

      I bang my head when this argument (or those like it) come up. Ohh Macs can boot Windows now, who's going to write Mac software! Sorry, but except for games, there is *nothing* that will get me to leave OS X.

      I challenge you to build such an amazing piece of software that I would be compelled to buy it for an OS I hate booting, because to me Virtualization is solely a means to test my websites in IE.

  3. Re:Parallels Vs. VMWare by SoulRank · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I came *THIS CLOSE* (holds fingers close together) to buying a Macbook Pro a month ago - it was the lack of a right mouse button and non-native support for Linux that killed it for me.
    Something tells me your intent to buy the Macbook Pro wasnt put off by the lack of the right mouse button. Firstly the Macbook Pro doenst come with mouse because it's a notebook. Secondly, OSX supports just about any USB 2 and 3 button mice.
  4. Re:Parallels Vs. VMWare by shmlco · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Just an FYI, but the new MacBook Pros have a "right-click" control panel option whereby if you put two fingers on the pad while you click the button it's interpreted as a right click. Much easier to do than say, and no more "control-click". And the Parallels/Boot Camp drivers for Windows look for this as well.

    As to Linux... well, it's open source. Just change the driver yourself. ;)

    --
    Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
  5. updates by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not that happy with their charging for program updates after a year's passed since you purchase it. I understand it costs the company to generate updates, but I'm certain that Microsoft and/or Apple will produce their own updates that will break Parallels. Updates will be a necessity, and I'm hesitant to buy a product that will generate a long-term expense on my part in order to keep using it.

  6. Re:Windows is the new Classic by GreatDrok · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "You never know. As long as running Windows in Parallels requires a copy of Windows that's purchased from Microsoft, they're still getting their money. Parallels is an interesting situation for Microsoft, as it means that some portion of the folks buying Macs are paying them for Windows anyway (and at retail prices at that, which is much more profitable for Microsoft than OEM)."

    That isn't the problem for MS. Lets put it this way. I own four Macs and recently got rid of my only PC because I could now do everything I needed to using the Macs. If absolutely necessary, I can boot Windows in Parallels to run a specific piece of software just like I used to with OS9 apps but, just as I stopped buying OS9 apps, I also won't be buying Windows software even though I can run it. My preference is for OSX apps and I'm sure I'm not alone. What this does is it makes Windows a legacy system and legacy systems fade away eventually. MS might well be making good money off Windows sales to Mac users for the moment but what if more and more people buy Macs and prefer to buy OSX software? Well, software companies will fill the need and eventually these people will find that they don't need Windows any more so they will stop installing it. If that happens, the MS monopoly will be broken. MS really should be scared (I bet they are too). Windows isn't popular because it is good (it isn't) but because it has many many apps. Those apps can now run nicely on a Mac so people can buy a Mac without missing out on the apps but native ones are much nicer so once the move to Mac is made, the desire to purchase Windows software will decline and the market will notice.

    --
    "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
  7. Re:Parallels Desktop simply kicks ass by Swift2001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They're rushing like crazy, on the Mac at least -- they also make it for Windows -- to become the de facto standard before VM Ware for the Mac comes out.

  8. Re:Parallels Vs. VMWare by thestuckmud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Aha! You like trackpoints because you keep your fingers on the home row.

    Good for you. That helps explain your preference.

    Still, you said not having three buttons was part of the problem without explaining why. And that makes me wonder since my experience shows it works quite well, even for applications that need 2 or 3 buttons.

    I am also puzzled because you confirmed my complaint about 3-button laptops - that you have to move your thumb sideways for every mouse click - and then said Apple's interface is the awkward one. Have you tried them both long enough to get used to them?

    Anyway, my point is that many people who are used to three-button laptops may well find Apple's one-button approach more than adequate. Having used both for thousands of hours, I have - to my own surprise - come to prefer the single button trackpad. Not only for native OS X applications, but for Windows (under parallels and via VNC) and X11, using 2- or 3-button emulation. So much so, that I prefer using my laptop to interface with my Windows box rather than the very nice keyboard and mouse on it.

    Apple's trackpad is very good. I'm not asking you to like it. But I'd like you to accept that it will be adequate (even excellent) for many users.