Parallels Desktop 5 for Mac Released

[cosmos]

I have the same problem as this guy... http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?t=95481

Oh and it isn't an upgrade when they remove Parallels 4 and then install Parallels 5. So going back you better have made a snapshot of the image, and have the dmg for installing PD 4 again.

I was able to launch Windows by changing the configuration to a single CPU.
This will stop the BSOD and start the upgrade of Parallels Tools. Once Tools finally upgrades (took over an hour for me) Windows starts fine.

Once Parallels Tools in updated you can then change the config to run more than one CPU. I have my config set to 8 CPUs running 64-bit Snow Leopard.

So far it seems to be much more responsive than Parallels 4.

 

[gr8tfly]

I think the problem many are having is being forced to upgrade to 4, since Parallels 3 quit working with the Snow Leopard upgrade and Parallels didn't even try to fix it. Now here comes 5. Very poorly handled.

The did fix it with an update to version 4 (to 4.1, I believe). Version 4 came out in November, 2008, 10 months before the release of Snow Leopard. That's probably why they didn't want to fix version 3 - version 4 was already well established by then. That also means it's been one year for development and release of version 5. That's not unreasonable. You (not you in particular) could have upgraded to version 4 when it came out, then not experience the short delay between their August update and version 5's release. There's always the chance the "new model" will come out the next day when buying a piece of technology. They do offer a free upgrade within a certain time, too (though I forget how long they're giving - never enough, though ).

edit: btw, I'm not sticking up for Parallels, in particular, as a company. I tend to agree they don't have the greatest reputation for customer support. My comments are about software development in general.

 

[hugodrax]

I prefer Parallels over VMware... I've used them both.

VMware has a more sensible configuration interface than P4 but I just couldn't get it to work with one of my printers. VM Fusion also seems a lot more sluggish than Parallels to me.

Parallels also comes free with a lot of macs depending on where you buy.

Overall, I really like it and will upgrade to version 5. Never had any need for their forums or support... I just use it.

VMWARE has always been slower in performance. I am downloading 5 to compare with vmware 3

 

[jaw04005]

They do offer a free upgrade within a certain time, too (though I forget how long they're giving - never enough, though .

Sure they offer a “free upgrade.” Of course, that upgrade eligibility period conveniently starts the day after their “Upgrade to 4 for Snow Leopard support” promotional period ended (which was $10 off the normal upgrade price, not much). Therefore, excluding most customers that purchased 4.0 because 3.0 wouldn’t run on 10.6.

I paid for Parallels 1.x, 2.5, 3.0 and 4.0. Now, they’ve lost me as a customer. Weirdly enough, I actually got paid $3 to be VMware Fusion customer (bought 2.0 on Amazon for $26.98, mailed in my $30 competitive rebate form, got a $30 check and this week e-mailed in my upgrade to Fusion 3.0 for free coupon.).

You can’t keep screwing your customers forever. I have a feeling for at least some Parallels customers this was the last straw.

 

[GreatDrok]

I've been a Parallels customer since the first beta using my 1st gen MacBook Pro. Now colour me impressed with 5. I have Win 7 running in it and even though my MBP is pushing 4 years old (bought it in April 2006) it is running with full Aero support. I did try the beta of 5 and it said Aero wasn't supported because of the X1600 Mac driver but it looks like they've worked around it.

Performance is what you would expect from a virtualised machine. Not as smooth as a real machine but not terrible.

I've always wondered when a company would theme Windows when running seamlessly and Parallels has done it with Maclook. Very cool.

 

[Mr Putter]

upgrade coming

Was slightly annoyed, having bought version 4 in September to go with Snow Leopard.

Looks like they've been taking notice of the backlash though -

------






http://www.parallels.com/products/desktop5/popup/graceperiod/

Purchased in September 2009
For customers who purchased Parallels Desktop 4.0 for Mac between Aug 25 and September 30, we value your business and want to provide a special offer to upgrade to Parallels Desktop 5 for Mac. Although you are not eligible for our Grace Period free upgrade program, we’d like to offer you a very special upgrade price. This program will be made available for you very soon. If you qualify and would like to receive this offer, please email 2upgrade@parallels.com, and we will send you the information shortly.

 

[BVeritas]

The did fix it with an update to version 4 (to 4.1, I believe). Version 4 came out in November, 2008, 10 months before the release of Snow Leopard. That's probably why they didn't want to fix version 3 - version 4 was already well established by then. That also means it's been one year for development and release of version 5. That's not unreasonable. You (not you in particular) could have upgraded to version 4 when it came out, then not experience the short delay between their August update and version 5's release. There's always the chance the "new model" will come out the next day when buying a piece of technology. They do offer a free upgrade within a certain time, too (though I forget how long they're giving - never enough, though ).

edit: btw, I'm not sticking up for Parallels, in particular, as a company. I tend to agree they don't have the greatest reputation for customer support. My comments are about software development in general.

Understand your argument, but I'm used to buying an app, being able to upgrade my OS and using the app until "I" decide it's time to pay for an upgrade. Fusion didn't die with the Snow Leopard upgrade, so I expect Parallels to make it work.

In a way Apple increased expectations with a ridiculous price on Snow Leopard. Buying the OS for $29 and then having to pay $49 for something I seldom use feels wrong.

 

[lifeinhd]

Just because 5 came out doesn't disable 4. If you don't want the new features, don't buy them.

Here's the thing though: most people were just fine using 3, and didn't want to get 4. They were forced to get 4 because they upgraded their OS only to find 3 didn't work. Any honest company would have warned that a new release was around the corner, and to hold off upgrading if possible. Or better yet, given Parallels 5 away to customers who had purchased 4 within a certain time frame. It's just wrong and a poor business practice to all of a sudden throw this at people who just upgraded-- and because they had to at that.

 

[gr8tfly]

In a way Apple increased expectations with a ridiculous price on Snow Leopard. Buying the OS for $29 and then having to pay $49 for something I seldom use feels wrong.

I do know what you mean - it's funny how we think, sometimes. I just spent $10 more for the upgrade than I did Snow Leopard itself. I still think we got a deal on SL, though - I was pretty shocked at the $30 price, having expected the normal $129. Oh well - software marches on....

 

[Cerebrus' Maw]

Looks good, will have to check it out

 

[ZaoPetra]

Yep. I'll probably get this for AutoCad alone. The labs at school aren't open forever after all. Damn lazy Autodesk.

If I had a Mac version of AutoCAD I could quite using Windows altogether. Is there any news on what AutoDesk decided after their pole? Are you saying that Parallels handles CAD better than VM Fusion? I'm only asking because I've only ever used Parallels and I'm thinking of switching to Fusion.

 

[Zeos]

I'm new to Mac world. It's better this one or vmware fusion 3 ? Witch one shoud I get ?

IMHO, Parallels has the better overall interface and performance. I used Fusion through version 2, and it was okay, but I am liking Parallels better (using Windows 7) for overall feel, general usability, and functionality.

 

[Am3822]

Maybe they should haven taken a leaf out of Codeweavers' page, as far as upgrades/updates are concerned.

As an aside -- how complicated is it to convert a Parallels VM to a one usable by vmware?

 

[mankar4]

anybody seen any benchmarks for parallels 5 vs fusion 3?

 

[bobnugget]

Not sure why this rubbish is on the front page. VMWare Fusion has been a far better supported product, for me at least. Having started using both whilst they were in beta, I stopped using Parallels with version 3.0, when it seemed to be getting worse with every build.

Performance was always better the Fusion, but Fusion seemed to be much more stable, performing its job without modifying Windows system files (so not as much chance of the BSOD cycle, and you could always be sure when Fusion died, you could always get to the GUI in Boot Camp). Support requests in Parallels Forums nearly always went unanswered, whilst VMWare Forums always seemed to quickly find a solution or workaround.

After my experiences with 2.x, and the subsequent bug fixes that were only in the 3.0 upgrade, I am entirely not surprised that they would make people upgrade to make the app work with a new OS. Their support is shoddy and half-arsed, and if you want a stable OS emulation that you can rely on for production use, stick with VMWare and avoid this rubbish like the plague.

 

[Kovacs]

The upgrade price of $49.99 is apparently not available for all. When I go to their store and choose upgrade I get the price in Norwegian Kroner. When I remove the stupid fee for "digital locker" the price comes to just below $65. Huh?

 

[RS232]

Parallels 5 for me!

Parallels 4.0... was good but not great - used that a few months.
Fusion 3.0... Been using it for a week - I was wowed by it and tempted to jump to VMware
Parallels 5.0... For a few hours - Very impressed! That's my choice!

The Aero handling and seems smoother than Fusion and the performance is a tad quicker in Parallels 5.

This is based on my experiences on my MacBook UMB 2.4Ghz 4GB.

 

[AppleMatt]

Signed up to this forum just to post this. Normally, I just lurk and read the page 1 and page 2 news, but this time, I feel that I have a duty as part of the consumer community to report my experiences with this miserable company.

I've been using Parallels from v1 to v4. The product in itself is actually okay...until something goes wrong (like, for example, when there's a new Linux distro release). Good luck getting them to even acknowledge the problem. It took months for the Parallels team to get Parallels 4 tools working with Ubuntu's hardy heron, for example. They wouldn't even acknowledge the issue on their user forums, and it was the biggest thread during this period.

Their user community forum is a joke. They routinely screen for negative comments...those posts just never show up on the forums. And they don't acknowledge problems for weeks or months, even as the community struggles to help each other out.

Absolutely correct. It was only after a protracted discussion with technical 'support' (who don't understand basic English) how bad I realised they were. Parallels 3 was excellent for me, but for whatever reason 4 just hated my computer. That in itself isn't an issue, but trying to get anything...at all...from them is. As you said, you can't even post your problem on new products to their own forums because they read (and delete it) before it even appears.

If anyone is considering this upgrade, I strongly recommend they search google for all the broken promises Parallels have made about features coming in free updates to previous upgrades, and then charging for them (or, indeed, any complaints about their service).

If that's the kind of company you want to purchase from, so be it.

AppleMatt

 

[Ropie]

I think the problem many are having is being forced to upgrade to 4, since Parallels 3 quit working with the Snow Leopard upgrade and Parallels didn't even try to fix it. Now here comes 5. Very poorly handled.

Parallels 3 does work on Snow Leopard, for me at any rate - I use it regularly to run Autocad and have no problems printing from it either. Have a look here:

http://toni.uebernickel.info/apple/parallels-3-on-snow-leopard/

 

[OllyW]

Parallels 3 does work on Snow Leopard, for me at any rate - I use it regularly to run Autocad and have no problems printing from it either. Have a look here:

http://toni.uebernickel.info/apple/parallels-3-on-snow-leopard/

Great. Does this mean they have engineered a block to stop Parallels 3 working with Snow Leopard purely to make you pay for an upgrade?

 

[Ropie]

Great. Does this mean they have engineered a block to stop Parallels 3 working with Snow Leopard purely to make you pay for an upgrade?

It doesn't work seamlessly and I suppose they had to work to get it to run properly on SL, hence Parallels 4 and an upgrade fee.

 

[throttlemeister]

OMG, a software company charging for a major version upgrade. How dare they! BOOHOO.

News flash: almost every single software company charges money for major version upgrades. Get over it. You don't work for free, and neither do they.

That said, I am very happy with my free license after participating the beta program.

 

[jayenh]

Here's the thing though: most people were just fine using 3, and didn't want to get 4. They were forced to get 4 because they upgraded their OS only to find 3 didn't work. Any honest company would have warned that a new release was around the corner, and to hold off upgrading if possible. Or better yet, given Parallels 5 away to customers who had purchased 4 within a certain time frame. It's just wrong and a poor business practice to all of a sudden throw this at people who just upgraded-- and because they had to at that.

worse than that, they actually stated on their website that v3 users would get a patch to get 3 working with snow leopard. they then backtracked on this as they saw it as an opportunity to force cash out of people that had no reason to upgrade to 4 when it was first released. at this point i ditched parallels for virtualbox. i use my windows VM for admin tools that only run on windows so VB and XP does the job just fine.

 

[dash7]

Seriously?

The VMWare announcement is on Page 2 because it's 8 days old while the Parallels announcement is new.

Only geniuses like you could see a consipracy in chronologically ordering things.

Its not chronologically ordered, genius.
You should try thinking before posting and mocking others, seriously thats embarrassing.



I dont have any problems with endorsing one product over the other or ads. But doing it in such a hidden and "newsworthy / not newsworthy" secret way - thats no quality journalism.
Now I'll have to wonder over every newsitem why its on page one, or two or not showing at all. In the end it seems its the money that decides about the newsworthiness for MacRumors.com.

MacRumors Pay to Play?
Nicely done. I'm finished with this site.

Bookmark trashed - back to AppleInsider.com

 

[Shivetya]

I have never used VM/Parallels so I have to ask.

I need to connect to work through VPN to run 5250 sessions, notes, and the like. Can I do this through either of these products without booting into Windows ?