Home

After many years as a contented Windows users, I decided 5 months ago to invest in an iMAC and walk away from PCs forever. For most of my day to day apps, I found a satisfactory Mac equivelant - but there are a few things for which I just couldn't find an alternative - thank heavens for Parallels ! Install was easy, and every boot of Windows Vista takes under 30 seconds. Running as a windowed Mac app, I use MS Money, Fruity Loops and Family Historian without any problems. I also have reinstalled my Office 2007 and MindManager for work use - again no issues at all. I can back up Windows files to my external USB drive connected to the map, and sound played via the iMACs soundcard works fine. 5 Months later, still crash free and after numerous trouble-free auto-upgrades of Vista and office software, I have absolutely no complaints with Parallels, and finally sold my last Windows laptop last week.

(39 of 40 people found this review useful)

I can't argue about the faster more efficient performance of Windows via Parallel Desktop over the use of Windows on a PC, or the preference of Parallels over Boot Camp in preventing the need to keep re-booting to get from Mac OS to Windows. However, I currently have a GPS unit (Satmap Active 10) which is recognised and uses Satmap downloaded software to access the Active 10 via Boot Camp, but not through Parallels. While the people at Satmap are working on it, my current work-round is to connect Active 10 to an old brick (PC laptop) to download data, transfer it to MacBook via Flash Drive then make any changes before reversing the route to get it back on the Active 10 - no good when you're away from home, who wants to carry a laptop, let alone a laptop plus your MacBook?

(10 of 15 people found this review useful)

I've been used Parallels since version 3.0. The v.4.0 has been improved but still, slow on loading games and graphic design. I preferred to use Boot Camp on my 2nd MBP.

(20 of 26 people found this review useful)

I am a recent MAC man. A PC Bigot for 20 years, I bought an iMac last year. I have to run Windows for the only reason that I have to use Outlook (sorry Entourage is not as good). I installed Fusion last year and was happy with the functionality and in fairness it works OK. I bought a MacBook a few weeks ago and decided to try Parallells Desktop on that.

They both, load easily, install and run Windows very quickly (faster than my remaining PC which has huge memory and a very fast processor!) BUT Parallels is much better in action. Coherence Mode is magnificent, outlook runs as if it is just another Mac application and so it feels much more integrated. Would I advise against Fusion - no, it is just that I am more impressed with Parallels.

(44 of 51 people found this review useful)

This is how all applications should run.. simple / powerfull and works fantastic... I have had no problems and is a joy to use...

(17 of 20 people found this review useful)

Parallels does what it says on the tin, so it gets an ok score from me. However, you'll get far better performance and usability from VMWare Fusion

(13 of 16 people found this review useful)

This is an intuitive peace of art. The integration between MS and APPLE is well done. I use this for testing website in a windows like enviroment and for that its good, but one small drawback. I have a fully packed MAC BOOK PRO 4GB 2,5GHZ 7200 200GB disk and even then running windows and heavy apps is not that admirable. Its simply to slow.

(21 of 23 people found this review useful)

I downloaded the limited trial version to play with. Loaded XP Pro into my iMac in no time flat. I have now installed many PC items (including games) with no problem, although some run a little slow. I have also installed Mandriva Linux, but this has a few problems (like small windows).
However, I'm totally convinced for Windows use, and have now ordered a box. I recommend trying the trial version if uncertain, and of course you need a copy of Windows too!

(27 of 29 people found this review useful)