Parallels Desktop For Mac Vs. VMware

neilticktin writes "MacTech performed an exhaustive set of benchmarks comparing Parallels Desktop 4 to VMWare Fusion 2 to run Windows on a Mac. To tackle this problem, MacTech undertook a huge benchmarking project starting in December — over 2500 tests by stopwatch. The goal was to see how the recent versions of VMWare Fusion and Parallels Desktop performed on different levels of Mac hardware, using XP, Vista, 64-bit, multi-procs, games, etc. ... As usual, results vary by what's important to you."

Comments

Desktop Comparison

[TheNinjaroach]

This is a desktop comparison, VMware ESXi is of the server variety and I assume by the name Citrix XenServer is as well.

Re:Citrix?

[Lucid 3ntr0py]

ESXi is not for 90% of home users. It is built for large scale hosting where VMfusion and Parallels are often used for single client instances.

Re:Slashdotted after 3 comments

[AKAImBatman]

Personally, I prefer VirtualBox. It has all the features you expect of a professional VM (rootless desktop, 3D acceleration, drive passthrough, etc.) but is available for the low-low price of $0.

The situation looks a bit different if you're going to use it for business purposes, but for home use there is no better option than VirtualBox.

Re:free?

[0100010001010011]

I would have liked to see Sun's VirtualBoxthrown into the mix. I use Fusion and "love" it (as much as one can love having to use Windows), but a free alternative would be nice.

That being said, I also use Crossover (WINE) for quite a few things (IE6, RegexBuddy) so I don't have to launch a full VM image.

The article is loading (slowly) through Coral cache

Re:free?

[TheRaven64]

I switched from Parallels Desktop to VirtualBox and it has one feature which I really like; the ability to run for over a week without causing a kernel panic. This was something the version of Parallels I paid for couldn't do. Apparently they messed up the IPI handling (doing something that was wrong but relatively harmless on the Core 1, and very bad on the Core 2), but the only way of 'fixing' the problem way to buy the next version of the product. Since I don't like paying for bug fixes, I never found out if the new version actually did fix the problem, but there's no way I'd give the company any money after that.

VirtualBox got off to a slow start. There were some issues for a long while that prevented it from running FreeBSD in guests, but they were fixed with the 2.1.2 release. Now it works very well, and I didn't have to pay anything to go from the old release to the one that actually works (or for the original release, for that matter). The latest version apparently supports 3D on Windows guests, but I don't have a Windows install set up at the moment so I haven't been able to test this.

Re:Uhhh, it does?

[AKAImBatman]

That's from nearly two years ago. There's now support for hardware accelerated 3D. From section 4.8 of the user manual:

Starting with version 2.1, the VirtualBox Guest Additions for Windows contain experimental hardware 3D support.

With this new feature, if an application inside your Windows guest uses 3D features
through the OpenGL programming interfaces, these will not be emulated in software
(which is slow), but instead VirtualBox will attempt to use your host's 3D hardware.
This works for all supported host platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Solaris), provided
that your host operating system can make use of your accelerated 3D hardware in the
first place.

Re:Always funny to me...

[IANAAC]

I can't speak for Mac use, but I've used Linux pretty much full time for the last few years. I am a freelance translator, and have, for the most part, been able to function fine without any Microsoft products. There is one program that is fairly industry-standard though: Trados. It only runs on Windows. There *ARE* viable alternatives, however, agencies insist on assigning/receiving projects in that format.

It sucks that I am sometimes forced to use it, but I lose a sale if I don't.

That's my reasoning for needing a Windows instance, and I bet my situation is not that uncommon.

Re:This violates VMware's EULA

[Anonymous Coward]

From Fusion EULA:

You may use the Software to conduct internal performance testing and benchmarking studies, the results of which you (and not unauthorized third parties) may publish or publicly disseminate; provided that VMware has reviewed and approved of the methodology, assumptions and other parameters of the study. Please contact VMware at benchmark@vmware.com to request such review.

Re:This violates VMware's EULA

[ganhawk]

Wrong! VMware only wants to review the methodology and approve it. You do not have to get the results approved.

From register.vmware.com/content/eula.html

"you (and not unauthorized third parties) may publish or publicly disseminate; provided that VMware has reviewed and approved of the methodology, assumptions and other parameters of the study. Please contact VMware at benchmark@vmware.com to request such review."