VMWare Fusion vs. Parallels Desktop

[Breegy]

Hello. This is my first post, so please be gentle. I have looked for a thread similar to this and, unless one has been posted in the past five hours, haven't found anything. I've been lurking on the forums for weeks but finally decided to sign up.

I'm currently saving up for a MacBook this fall. It will be my first Mac (I'm so excited). I am interested in running Windows XP next to OS X. Mostly for games every once in awhile, and occasionally a few Windows applications. However, I want this process to run very smoothly next to Leopard and not have to reboot every time, since I will most likely be chatting or surfing on Leopard along with playing the game.

I'm interested in purchasing either Fusion or Parallels. I've looked at both of the system requirements and descriptions of both programs, but honestly I don't really understand the difference. Which is better? What about cheaper? Which do you recommend? Do they work differently, or are they practically the same?

I believe Fusion is for people who will do more extensive work, such as graphic editing or maybe games that need more specs to run. However, I'm not sure.

If you could please bring some clarity on this topic, it would be much appreciated.

 

[Darth.Titan]

I've used both, and it's Fusion hands-down. It just works better to me, and Convergence Mode works better than Parallel's version.

And here's a friendly tip, when searching the forums here, use the Google search. It seem to get better results.
There are 100 different Fusion vs. Parallels threads so if you didn't find any you were doing something wrong.
Welcome to MacRumors

 

[flyinmac]

I'm using Fusion now (only second day with it). Works great.

I've got Vista Ultimate working with both BootCamp (as in directly on the computer in it's own partition) and also in Fusion. Using the same install. And, I have it activated in both environments.

From what I understand, that's something that Parallels can only do with XP. So, that's a plus for me with Fusion.

I can use Vista directly on the hardware when I need to do something that requires the fastest speed possible. But, I can boot it quickly in Fusion without rebooting my computer to do something that isn't worth waiting for a restart (or isn't going to take long enough to warrant exiting OS X and booting Windows directly).

So, I got the best of both worlds.

As a bonus, I went ahead and created a second virtual machine with Ubuntu Linux. And, am debating on other Virtual Machines for other things I like to tinker with.

I say go with Fusion.

 

[Neil321]

What id suggest is you try each out for yourself,both have free trials,here is a selection of threads on the great Fusion vs parallel's debate,my vote goes to Fusion

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/475701/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/481564/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/300033/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/490786/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/474576/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/487143/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/474576/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/488244/

Welcome to MR's

 

[fredsarran]

I tried both and found Parallels quicker. When I tried Fusion, it was one of the first released version so I do not know now. I do wish to say that Parallels completely messed up my bootcamp partition and it did not want to mount anymore after quitting Parallels.

Both cannot really handle 3D games, so I recommend Bootcamp. Parallels is the first to put virtualization on a Mac, but VMware (Fusion) has a lot of experience.

 

[RealEvil]

For me the advantage of Fusion is that VMWare is the industry standard for virtual machines. You could take a VM your company uses and put it on your mac. I regularly take VMs from my XP work machine and run them on my mac and vice versa. I know Parallels can convert VMWare VMs but who needs the hassle?

 

[Breegy]

Thanks for your input guys. Most of you say Fusion is better.

I won't be dealing much with Linux, or Vista. I mostly want the simplicity off Windows XP, which is what I'm used to. Also, I've never used Linux, so it would be pretty pointless for me to start when I have OS X. I've only heard bad things about Vista.. I guess whichever one (Fusion or Parallels) is simpler and easier to use and also least problematic is the one I should go with. Still not sure which one that is though.

However, I will take a look at the links Neil posted (thanks!btw How did I not find those?!). I still quite don't understand the two different programs.

Thanks a bunch

 

[Neil321]

However, I will take a look at the links Neil posted (thanks!btw How did I not find those?!). I still quite don't understand the two different programs.Thanks a bunch

To be honest i don't know how you missed them as it's one of the most talked about topics on here type Fusion vs Parallel's in the search box and voila