advice for running parallels or vmware on mac pro

Discussion in 'Apple' started by pheonix1t, Jul 2, 2007.

  1. pheonix1t

    pheonix1t Guest

    hello,
    I'm looking to buy a mac pro very soon. I'd get it with at least 8gb
    of ram.

    What i'm wondering about is how well it would handle running vista on
    vmware or parallels. After reading some previous posts in this group,
    it looks like vista support is spotty. I have to run windows OS
    sometimes for work. I wouldn't be running this all the time. But
    when I do run it I need it to work well. It's either this or getting
    a good quality HP workstation like the HP xw9400. I really prefer to
    get a mac since I already have mac laptop.

    Thanks,

    Oskar
     
    pheonix1t, Jul 2, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. pheonix1t

    Dick Sidbury Guest

    Vista Business can be virtualized as per the EULA and it seems to be
    working on my machine although it was only installed over the weekend.
    My machine is 2.66 gh with 5gb ram.

    dick
     
    Dick Sidbury, Jul 3, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Page 10 of the current Parallels owners manual, downloadable from their
    web site, says "Extended Boot Camp Support If you already have Boot Camp
    with Windows XP or Windows Vista partition, you don't have to re-install
    Windows in a virtual machine. A virtual machine that will use the Boot
    Camp partition will be created automatically during Parallels Desktop
    installation. You can use the Boot Camp partition both from this virtual
    machine and the Boot Camp. For details see Using Boot Camp Windows
    Partition (page 250)."

    Searching the manual for "boot camp partition" yields 22 occurrences.

    Here is something that would most likely interest you, from page 252:

    "Limitations for Parallels virtual machines using Boot Camp partition
    Parallels virtual machine using Boot Camp Windows partition either as a
    bootable volume or as a data disk has a number of limitations:

    "1 It cannot be suspended or paused.

    "2 Such a virtual machine cannot have snapshots, and the Undo disks
    feature cannot be enabled for it.

    "3 Compression or compacting cannot be performed for the Windows on the
    Boot Camp partition."
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 9, 2007
    #3
  4. If the Windows partition is FAT (whichever version of FAT that Boot Camp
    formats it as), there should be no problem transferring in either
    direction. If it's NTFS, I believe that you should still be able to
    transfer from the Windows partition to the Mac partition.
    Of course; it's a text file. There is no reason that you couldn't open
    it. Same for a GIF file, a BMP file, a JPG file, a FileMaker Pro file
    etc. If there is a Macintosh application that can read and write that
    file format, you'll be able to open the file and edit the contents
    There is no such thing as "boot directly into the Windows partition"; it
    does not make sense any more than "Colorless green ideas sleep
    furiously." makes sense.

    What you mean is "boot the Windows operating system", or in the
    vernacular, "boot Windows."
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 10, 2007
    #4
  5. How recently is recently? Parallels 3.0 has been out for more than a
    month.

    Unfortunately, the documentation for earlier versions is not on line at
    their site, so I can't search that documentation to see whether it
    addresses Boot Camp.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 10, 2007
    #5
  6. No, the most recent version is 3.0; that is easily determined from
    reading their web site's home page.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 10, 2007
    #6
  7. pheonix1t

    Warren Oates Guest

    I hate it when you destroy my illusions; now I have to cancel the order
    for the 10000 t-shirts that said just that.
     
    Warren Oates, Jul 10, 2007
    #7
  8. If you'd actually gone to the web site when I first posted its
    address, you'd have seen that the current version is 3.0, and perhaps
    you might have realised that one reason why you're having problems
    which others do not have is that you're using an obsolete version of
    the app.[/QUOTE]

    Further, I believe that using Boot Camp partitions with Parallels
    Desktop was introduced with version 2.0 of Parallels Desktop, and 2.0
    was a free upgrade, unlike the for-pay 3.0.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 10, 2007
    #8
  9. pheonix1t

    TaliesinSoft Guest

    [when replying to Tom Stiller's preceding posting in this thread]
    The most recent version of Parallels Desktop is 3.0 (Build 4128) released on
    June 9th of this year. The accompanying manual 06WFM-01, has 246 pages, and
    the index makes numerous references to Boot Camp.

    My understanding is that an increment in the version number, say from 3.0 to
    3.1 is applied when a new feature is added, a feature which can be downloaded
    at no cost, and that a change in the decimal part of the version number
    indicates that it is a "major" upgrade and will be charged for. The build
    number increases as bugs and such are fixed.
     
    TaliesinSoft, Jul 10, 2007
    #9
  10. I'm pretty sure that it was 2.5 that introduced using Boot Camp
    partitions, but that was also a free upgrade.[/QUOTE]

    The important point is that Conrad once again showed that he knows not
    of which he speaks (or types).

    If he put in half as much time on learning basics as he does with his
    esoteric off the wall stuff that he gets wrong anyway, he would have no
    more than one tenth of the problems he has.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 10, 2007
    #10
  11. One half the time? I'd say more like just one tenth the time.[/QUOTE]

    He's a slow learner.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 10, 2007
    #11
  12. pheonix1t

    TaliesinSoft Guest

    Mark,

    Yesterday I posted a reply to your posting in which you commented on the lack
    of information in the Parallels Desktop documentation regarding Boot Camp
    support. I can honestly say that the reply was strictly factual in content
    and that there was no sarcasm or such. I find it difficult to think that the
    Boot Camp release number was mistakenly used instead of the Parallels release
    number when the information included in your note also included the Parallels
    Desktop documentation ID. Here again is the entirety of that reply....

    ========================================

    [when replying to Tom Stiller's preceding posting in this thread]
    The most recent version of Parallels Desktop is 3.0 (Build 4128) released on
    June 9th of this year. The accompanying manual 06WFM-01, has 246 pages, and
    the index makes numerous references to Boot Camp.

    My understanding is that an increment in the version number, say from 3.0 to
    3.1 is applied when a new feature is added, a feature which can be downloaded
    at no cost, and that a change in the decimal part of the version number
    indicates that it is a "major" upgrade and will be charged for. The build
    number increases as bugs and such are fixed.

    ========================================
     
    TaliesinSoft, Jul 11, 2007
    #12
  13. Well, at 64, I find that I learn as fast as I did when I was in my 30s,
    so I'm not too worried. I'm more concerned about making it to 78.
    How were we supposed to know that, especially considering that you were
    using an outdated manual?
    Most likely because it had not occurred to us that you had done that,
    but that you were using Parallels 1.3, as evidenced by your using an
    outdated manual.
    We don't wonder why you do that; we know you do that because you're an
    asshole.
    You irritate us because you are, and act like, an asshole. We irritate
    you because we keep showing you that you don't know what you're talking
    about.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 11, 2007
    #13
  14. Everyone responded in a civil manner initially, but your uncivil
    approach frays people's civility right off them. You are reaping what
    you sowed, but like the ego centric person you are, you are unable to
    accept responsibility for the results of your own actions.
    Mark, you are not "the rest of us"; you are a minority of one.
    And that is what had been done, but after umpteen times of your
    deliberate hostility to being corrected, people started treating you in
    the manner that you begged for.
    The damage is done by you, Mark; not by them (or us, if you consider me
    to be one of "them").
    Without making any effort to determine whether those beliefs have any
    basis in reality.
    Unfortunately, this world is in a mess because all too many people do
    just that--blurt out whatever they believe, without any reasoned thought
    behind it.
    Until they demonstrate otherwise, as you have done. Then they lose
    respect and the right to being treated civilly.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 14, 2007
    #14
  15. pheonix1t

    Warren Oates Guest

    Bite me.
     
    Warren Oates, Jul 14, 2007
    #15
  16. You mean like the guy who keeps saying, "Hit me; I dare you to hit me.
    Are you too chicken to hit me?" and keeps getting in everyone else's
    face is never the one to loose his cool first?
    Thing is that we don't give you anything to get frustrated about, but
    you give us plenty to get frustrated about.
    It's not a matter of disagreement; it's a matter of deliberate
    provocation.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jul 15, 2007
    #16
  17. pheonix1t

    Guest Guest

    You mean the well-meaning, helpful and knowledgeable
    people who keep *correcting* your dangerously wrong
    and misleading posts? Those people are the scum?
    The people who keep trying to make sure that folks
    who don't know better avoid following your generally
    wrong and bad advice? Those kind people? *They*
    are the scum?
    We generally all started that way with you, but when
    you keep ignoring the right answers, arguing, and
    telling *us* that we're wrong, well, we find out
    who the trolls and scum really are, don't we.
    Yet, after all these years, I don't remember you
    ever - not once - actually helping anyone or providing
    useful or correct advice. Good thing you're here
    to help us navigate amongst the "scum".
    You've made yours quite explicit. I'll leave it to
    the kind folks who have recently added some of your
    admissions of trolling and guilt to the FAQ.

    This newsgroup really would be a much more pleasant
    place without you, but with due credit, you are
    sometimes somewhat entertaining. Kind of like watching
    car crashes and explosions in bad movies.
     
    Guest, Jul 15, 2007
    #17
  18. pheonix1t

    Guest Guest

    Hee! That's the funniest thing I've seen all day.
    You comparing yourself to Galileo. Okay, I mean,
    sure, its' still somewhat early and other funny
    things might happen today, but I'll be really
    impressed if anything else comes close.

    Here's one small clue to the differences: Galileo was right.
     
    Guest, Jul 15, 2007
    #18
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.