Parallels 5 and ML

[nanosour]

I currently run Parallel 5 for use with only one WinXP program that I need. I had a problem going to Lion and had to find a workaround via a "Parallels Desktop Launcher" that I now have to use to launch Parallels.

Is anyone still using Parallels 5 and any problems once ML installed? Any input appreciated as I'm waiting to go to ML till I get an answer.

Nano

 

[Jeff Chen]

PD said only 7 works in ML. Not even a chance for 6. 5 can just RIP I guess.

 

[Zetaprime]

PD said only 7 works in ML. Not even a chance for 6. 5 can just RIP I guess.

Yeah, seems to need the very latest update on 7. Once updated it works fine.

 

[nanosour]

Thanks for the replies. This is not good news and why I'm not a big fan of these OS X revisions every year when they are breaking key software. First Quicken with Lion and now Parallels with ML. Every year now you have to deal with headaches just to get the latest social networking software on your computer.

I'd rather keep my current Parallels ability than be able to twitter from any app on my computer. I guess I could spend $50 for Parallels 7, but who knows what other problems lie with trying to get my old WinXP onto that.

I'm passing on ML for as long as possible and in fact wish I'd stuck with Snow Leopard last summer.


Cheers,


Nano

 

[steve-p]

If you're upgrading OS X each year then it's the case that you need to keep Parallels or VMware up to date. That's just the way it is. Both vendors could probably patch the earlier versions to run if they wanted to, but they choose not to. The upgrade fees are a good revenue stream for them.

 

[SpyderBite]

It's not Apple's responsibility to make sure 3rd party apps run on their latest OS. It is the responsibility of the 3rd party app developers to make sure their software runs on the latest OS. And Parallels Desktop have done that.. with version 7.

You're blaming the wrong source of your problem. Parallels made it quite clear that only version 7 would be supported long before ML was released.

 

[nanosour]

I have to completely disagree with your statement. If apple is going to put out a new OS every year, it's ridiculous to thing that developers of every app on your computer should chase their tail to ensure their application will work with a new operating system. I have 1 operating system and hundreds of apps.

From Lion to ML is such a minor change, that to break key applications that people regularly use is insane. I experienced this with Lion, but won't repeat the process.

Cheers

 

[throttlemeister]

Nobody is holding a gun to your head to upgrade to ML. Some people are still running Tiger just because they like it better or need it for some software. Heck, the XP you want to run is 10 years old. If you need stuff that won't run after an upgrade, don't bitch, just don't upgrade.

 

[nanosour]

Not bitching, just trying to ensure others know what they are getting into before they chose to upgrade to ML.

I'm a pretty big mac fan...(just shy of a fanBoy) have been since my switch in early 05'. But I must say the recent OS X updates have been pretty frustrating in that they are coming so fast and impacting more and more applications.

Cheers

 

[throttlemeister]

In your case, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. You only need to start worrying when you need to run program A which doesn't run on the new OSX and program B that doesn't run on the on your current OSX, at which point you will have to make a choice. Until then, just ignore it.

 

[kodeman53]

Not bitching, just trying to ensure others know what they are getting into before they chose to upgrade to ML.

Anyone who has performed one op sys upgrade, OSX or Windows, knows this already. Some vendors provide new op sys support on ancient releases of their products (Microsoft Office for Mac 2008), some don't. You should ask Parallels why they don't support ML on a version of their product that's 2 versions out of date. I am sure they could use the laugh.

 

[throAU]

For what its worth, i run Fusion, and upgraded my install of Lion to ML with no issue.

Fusion still works.

Maybe parallels will too?


edit:
Oh... you have a very old version. I wouldn't count on it.

Virtualization is kernel modules, and i doubt they will still be working from a version that old.


This isn't apple's fault. Big kernel changes will unfortunately affect software that has kernel modules.


If its for "one XP program i need" then try virtualbox (it is free)? If virtualbox works, ditch parallels?

 

[50548]

Anyone who has performed one op sys upgrade, OSX or Windows, knows this already. Some vendors provide new op sys support on ancient releases of their products (Microsoft Office for Mac 2008), some don't. You should ask Parallels why they don't support ML on a version of their product that's 2 versions out of date. I am sure they could use the laugh.

Parallels 6 is ALSO not supported, even though I bought it in May 2011 - Parallels is famous for its ridiculously-bad support, and there is a specific Parallels forum thread on this right now. Now they tell people to buy version 7 because it "guarantees" a free upgrade to version 8 - the only thing they don't really emphasize is that this "promotion" is valid only if version 8 is released within 6 months from 25 July 2012.

People are jumping ship and moving to Fusion or VirtualBox due to their greedy mandatory annual upgrade practices. They deserve it.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

First Quicken with Lion and now Parallels with ML.

Huh? You should be taking issue with the makers of the app and their update/upgrade policy.

 

[deeddawg]

Parallels made it quite clear that only version 7 would be supported long before ML was released.

When did Parallels make it clear that version 6 would not be supported on Mountain Lion? They had it listed for quite some time:

http://www.selikoff.net/2012/07/25/os-x-mountain-lion-kills-parallels-6/

 

[Runt888]

I have to completely disagree with your statement. If apple is going to put out a new OS every year, it's ridiculous to thing that developers of every app on your computer should chase their tail to ensure their application will work with a new operating system. I have 1 operating system and hundreds of apps.

From Lion to ML is such a minor change, that to break key applications that people regularly use is insane. I experienced this with Lion, but won't repeat the process.

Cheers

Speaking as a Mac developer, not a whole lot changed from Lion to ML (relatively). The app I develop worked perfectly on ML with no changes. Granted, it's not a VM that needs to work very closely with the hardware, but the point is that parallels could have very easily chosen to support earlier versions, but instead they decided to force people to upgrade. Blame parallels, not apple.

 

[50548]

When did Parallels make it clear that version 6 would not be supported on Mountain Lion? They had it listed for quite some time:

Image

http://www.selikoff.net/2012/07/25/os-x-mountain-lion-kills-parallels-6/

Exactly. Funnily (or sadly), the page above was changed to mention ONLY Parallels 7 exactly on the date of launch of ML...

There is absolutely NO excuse for Parallels to stop supporting version 6 apart from greed. They are gonna feel it in their pockets, this is sure.

 

[kwonie312]

Exactly. Funnily (or sadly), the page above was changed to mention ONLY Parallels 7 exactly on the date of launch of ML...

There is absolutely NO excuse for Parallels to stop supporting version 6 apart from greed. They are gonna feel it in their pockets, this is sure.

I never knew that they changed that web page on the ML launch day. More reason for me to get pissed at Parallel's action regarding this matter.

 

[50548]

I never knew that they changed that web page on the ML launch day. More reason for me to get pissed at Parallel's action regarding this matter.

They are losing customers in droves because of this debacle - VirtualBox is the way to go now.