Software :: Parallels 6 To Run 40% Faster/launch Windows 2x Faster Than Fusion

Sep 8, 2010

Parallels is expected to announce as early as Thursday the sixth major upgrade to its Windows virtualization software for Mac OS X, delivering a significant performance boost over its predecessor, as well as 80 other new features.

The new Parallels Desktop 6 for Mac has been shown on average to run 40 percent faster than last year's edition, according to people familiar with the matter. Those same people said that the upgrade -- expected to retail for the same $79.99 price as its predecessor -- will also feature Windows boot times that are roughly two times faster than version 3.1 of its primary competitor: VMWare Fusion.

VMware and Parallels have gone head to head in the virtualization market since 2008, when the Fusion product was first introduced. Parallels has existed since 2006, and both products retail for an identical prices. In a recent study, Parallels 5 was already found to be 30 percent faster on average than VMware Fusion 3.

Parallels 6 is also expected to showcase tighter integration with its users' natural environment, adopting support for the Mac OS X's keyboard shortcuts, Spotlight search engine, and Expose windows management features. Similarly, the upgrade will offer the option to automatically apply a Mac's parental controls to their corresponding Windows applications, according to those familiar with the product.

Another major focus for Parallels is said to be gaming. Version 6.0 will reportedly deliver up to two-fold performance improvements while adding support for Dolby 5.1 surround sound and better handling of 3G environments.

Parallels 6 will sport compatibility with an enhanced Parallels Mobile application that will offer users the option of remotely accessing their virtual machines on an iPad, as well as an iPhone or iPod touch.

Parallels Transporter, previously a standalone application that allowed users to migrate a virtual PC image to the Mac, will come built into the new release as well.

Earlier this week, Parallels Desktop 6 was spotted on the shelves of a Fry's Electronics store in California. The product has not yet been formally announced.[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

View 39 Replies


ADVERTISEMENT

Hardware :: Unable To See Video Or Anything / Fans Spinning Faster And Faster

Aug 7, 2009

My father owns one of the original G5s, so its power pc not intel. Today while browsing an excel spreadsheet he says part of the screen turned black, then the monitor shut off, then the monitor came back on but not video. Mean while the fans started spinning out of control. Now when he tries to turn it on, he gets power, but all that happens is the fans spinning faster and faster and faster until he turns it off. No video or anything. Just speeding fans. He fears the CPUs died since they control the fans. Any suggestions? He also says the fans were spinning unusually fast these last few days.

View 4 Replies View Related

OS X :: Windows XP Faster Than Leopard?

Jan 22, 2009

Okay I know this is about Windows, but I think I'll post it under the Mac OS X forum as the trouble I have is that I think my Leopard side of things is slower than my Windows side.

I recently had XP installed via Boot Camp on my MBP, and it seems to me that XP just does things pretty quickly. Firefox and MSN messenger launches very quickly and are very snappy. It also takes little to no time for XP to be responsive as it enters the desktop.

On the other hand, it takes quite a bit of time for Leopard to be usable as the desktop loads. The dock comes up, the toolbar takes a while to load, and the Airport, Volume, Date/Time etc icons take some more time to completely load. Then, when I launch OS X's equivalent of IM and browser apps (Adium and Firefox), they take some time to open, especially Firefox which can bounce for more than 8 times before launching.

I'm just wondering if XP is just snappier because it is more lightweight than Leopard? Or is it an anomaly and there are ways for me to speed up Leopard? Of course, I think that the fact that my Leopard partition dates back to about 3 years ago compared to a relatively fresh install of Windows will affect things, but the speed difference is very significant.

Also, OS X is set to the wrong time when I return to it from Windows, and it takes a good minute before it automatically adjusts itself, while Windows is always the right time. My Apple Wireless Keyboard is also usable from the get go in Windows, while it takes very long for OS X to start to use it.

View 22 Replies View Related

Applications :: Why BitTorrent Clients For Windows Faster Than Those For Mac?

Feb 6, 2009

I have been experimenting with many bittorrent clients for mac (utorrent, vuze, transmision, tomatotorrent) and they are all consistently slower to download a file that the original Bittorrent client for Windows. I compared them downloading the same file at the same time (the windows client running under parallels), and always the windows client beats the hell of the others. Is there a mac client comparably fast to the windows one?

View 2 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: Flight Simulator X - A Lot Faster And Generally Better

Dec 28, 2009

So i have just installed Microsoft Flight Simulator X on the bootcamp partition on the very latest white macbook before the uni-body ones were released and i am amazed!

The games works far better than on any genuine desktop or laptop PC i have ever played it on. The graphics are smoother with better FPS and the game is generally a lot faster and generally better. My mac just keeps impressing me!

I was just wondering if anybody else on here is a Flight Simulator X fan and if you're playing it on a mac? If you are, let me know!

View 2 Replies View Related

Applications :: Is Windows 7 Faster Than Snow Leopard?

Jul 9, 2010

I was just wondering what you guys think about this. I have both installed on my i5 Macbook Pro, and it seems that my Windows 7 installation is much snappier, especially in terms of playing video, opening and closing apps, etc, than my Snow Leopard installation is. (I installed the latest NVidia video drivers from laptop2go.) Games of course are much faster - Civ 4 is faster on Windows, but videos seem more vibrant as well.

Is it just me or have other people also noticed this?

View 13 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: 13" MBP Drains Much Faster When Using Windows In VMfusion?

Oct 10, 2009

I've noticed the Battery on my 13" MBP drains much faster when using Windows in VMfusion, makes sense running two OS's.

Question:

If I installed Windows via Bootcamp instead of VM would my battery last 'much' longer? I'm only running one OS so it should.

What's the best way to run Windows so I can get the most from the battery, is there any way to get the battery to last as long in Windows as it does in Mac ...

Running OS X goes an incredibly long time compared to Windows.

View 2 Replies View Related

OS X :: Windows 7 Puts My Macbook To Sleep Faster Than Snow Leopard?

Jan 1, 2010

I have a unibody Macbook Pro and I installed windows 7 64bit with bootcamp and one thing that i noticed is that windows 7 puts my macbook to sleep when I close the lid about 10 seconds faster than Snow Leopard does.
Snow Leopard takes about 10 to 15 seconds to put it to sleep and Windows take 2 to 5 seconds. Is this normal? It'd be funny if windows can do things faster than mac can with apple hardware.

View 5 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: Both Fusion And Parallels On Same Machine?

Sep 14, 2010

I currently run Fusion on my iMac but I really would like the try the new version of Parallels that came out this week.

Will I mess anything up by installing the demo version while still having Fusion installed? Of course I wouldn't run both at the same time, just have both installed.

View 2 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: To Have Both Parallels / Fusion And Bootcamp?

Nov 11, 2010

I read that for gaming, Bootcamp is the way to go, but for other general Windows use, Parallels or Fusion is the way to go.

But for me, I am planning to play games - hence Bootcamp - as well as use Parallels/Fusion for general use, namely to use Microsoft Office Onenote (an unbeatable note-taking software that needs a Mac version yesterday).

Is this even possible and how much memory will the additional parallels take (I'm planning a 40gb bootcamp partition btw on a 250gb hard drive)?

View 7 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: Parallels Desktop Or VMWare Fusion For Windows 7 RC?

May 7, 2009

I'm having pretty bad difficulties with Windows 7 and Parallels Desktop. I know it's not supported yet, but some folk have it working. I can boot up, but I can't install Parallels Tools. I changed the Configuration to "Windows 2008 Server" like someone suggested in another forum, but fails to boot up.

Seems like VMWare are offering a better helping hand than Parallels Desktop - and while it is not supported yet by them, they say that if you use Windows 2008 Server Config everything works apart from sound.

So am I best giving it a bash with VMWare's Fusion? 30-day trial for free. But I'd rather try get Parallels working since I paid for it.

View 9 Replies View Related

Applications :: Windows 7 XP Mode With Parallels Or Fusion?

Oct 31, 2009

Anyone tried to boot the Windows 7 XP Mode withi Parallels or VM Ware Fusion? Would be interesting to know if that works?

View 6 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: Internet Explorer Will Run In Parallels Or Fusion?

Nov 5, 2009

Does anyone know whether the free virtual machine images Microsoft offers developers to test older versions of Internet Explorer will run in Parallels or Fusion?

View 3 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: VMware Fusion 3 Vs Parallels Desktop 5

Jun 15, 2010

I wanted to to know and make a post comparing VMware Fusion 3 and Parallels Desktop 5 with the new updates. Which one is better in running multiple OSs at the same time. Do they support hypervisor. Cause i want to create a virtual environment to learn Server 2008 and Mac Os Server. Which one would be better to use VMware Fusion 3 or Parallels Desktop 5. As I said before I want this thread to be used to compare the two programs so if anybody else has question post them more question the better, of coarse if we get answers.

View 24 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: VirtualBox Compares To Fusion And Parallels Versions On MBA?

Oct 24, 2010

Any thoughts on how VirtualBox compares to the Fusion and Parallels versions? I think VirtualBox would be a nice free alternative if you are running Windows in Bootcamp.

View 3 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: 7 X86 And X64 - Parallels - Fusion And VirtualBox Benchmark Showdown

Jan 25, 2009

I just finished putting up some Benchmarks of Windows 7 using the latest builds of Parallels, Fusion and VirtualBox with both x86 and x64 based images on various Macs. More results coming soon. [URL]

View 3 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: VM Fusion - Parallels Or BootCamp To Play Games?

Nov 21, 2009

With winter break approaching I was planning to get some PC games(COD:MW2, Battlefield etc) and play them during break but I'm not sure which software would be best to play those games. I've looked at VM Fusion, Parallels and Bootcamp but I'm still not sure as to the advantages and disadvantages of each. Is there a way i can use a playstation 2 controller to play pc games running through bootcamp? I've heard that I need some kind of an adapter but I've been unsuccessful in finding one so far.

View 6 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: Bootcamp, Parallels Desktop 5 Or VMWare Fusion 3 - Which Is Best

Dec 26, 2009

I am an architect and I will be mostly using my new imac to work on Autocad 2010 along with a couple of other windows based applications. I understand the concept of the three methods of using windows but I do not know which would provide the best performance whilst working on Autocad, without it becoming a laborious task to load it up everyday.

I will be rocking dual monitors so I quite like the idea of Parallels or VMWare so that I can have Windows open on one monitor and Leopard on the other. But will this have a negative effect on the performance of Autocad? Also, which of these two is the better?

View 5 Replies View Related

MacBook Pro :: Windows 7 Install Licence Parallels/fusion?

Jun 13, 2010

Not sure if I should get vmfusion or parallels to run windows 7 on.

They both seem to be as good so I guess I am shallow enough to go for the best looking.

I will trial both with windows 7.

Can I do that with a single license copy of W7?

BTW I read very thread on ag v glossy and small text problems with hi res and worried for weeks!

As a 63 yr old with glasses for short sightedness (and a short temper) I am delighted with my 15 inch hi-res ag!

View 2 Replies View Related

Windows On Mac :: Parallels 3.0 & VMWare Fusion Together On The Same Boot Camp Partition?

Oct 13, 2008

I'm currently running Parallels 3.0 (XP Pro) off of a Boot Camp partition on my Macbook Pro. I'd like to give VMWare Fusion an audition, and am wondering if I can run it off that same BC partition that Parallels uses -- or if that will create some kind of conflict that might damage the partition. I'm not talking about having Parallels and VMWare running _simultaenously_ -- only installing them both to use the same partition.

View 8 Replies View Related

Mac Pro :: RAM Is 4x2 Faster Than 8x1?

Feb 16, 2008

I realise this subject has been done to death on various threads but I've not seen a comparison of like for like. BareFeats state that 8 are better than 4 but don't compare the same amount of RAM in each case, i.e. they don't compare 8GB with 8GB.I would expect that 4x2GB would have less latancy than 8x1GB so on average would be a tiny bit faster. Has anyone seen any test results?(I should say that I'm posting this out of scientific curiosity - from the practical point of view its better to go with 4x2 anyway because it leaves slots free.)

View 24 Replies View Related

MacBook Air :: CPU Faster Than Old One?

Dec 3, 2008

I think it will be overall faster (bus speed, ram speed, better video) but my question is this: Is the CPU faster than the old one? I know that they are using a Penryn 45nm version now. Will the new 1.6 be comparable to the older 1.8. Again I am just referring to CPU. The reason I ask this is that Penryn saw a 5-10% boost over Merom for the exact same clock speed I believe.

View 20 Replies View Related

Mac Pro :: One Frame Per Second Faster

Mar 19, 2009

COD4 Benchmarks, courtesy of BareFeats:
2009 Mac Pro with 4870: 60 frames per second
2007 Mac Pro with 4870: 59 frames per second

View 15 Replies View Related

Mac Pro :: Looking For Faster Computer

Apr 8, 2009

I can afford any computer I want, and will buy the one that I want. No lectures.But what feels faster to use? A MacBook Pro 2.93 with 4GB RAM and the 7200RPM drive, or a Mac Pro 8-core 2.26 with 6GB RAM?

View 24 Replies View Related

OS X :: How Finder Is So Much Faster?

Sep 3, 2009

Other than being a Cocoa app now and 64-bit support of course, I think Finder got so much faster especially with folders with a lot of content (like Apps folder) because it seems to load icon previews after it loads the file(s); where as (in my exp.)

Leopard seemed to try and load the files and icon previews at the same time then show you the contents, where as in SL I see the file first and then it loads the icon preview.

View 3 Replies View Related

MacBook Pro :: Use The Faster GPU ?

Dec 19, 2009

I do NOT play games on my MBP. I only run OSX. Mostly normal tasks, but I do a lot of video encoding with D-Vision, I-Squint and MPEG (Perian) Encoder and I-Movie. Should I ever switch over the the faster GPU? I never have since I bought this (early 2009 MBP)

View 24 Replies View Related

MacBook Pro :: How Much Faster Is I5/i7 Than C2D

Feb 11, 2010

apple will upgrade the uMBP line soon so i can get some new technology. My question is this....how much faster are the new laptops compared to my 1.33Ghz G4? and is it worth waiting for the i5/i7's to come out due to the increase in performance?

View 12 Replies View Related

Mac Pro :: Which Processor Is Better / Faster

Aug 12, 2010

I'm definitely no computer expert, but with all these Mac Pros with all these cores, I'm not sure how to read their configurations. The single quad core is 2.8 GHz. But if you get an 8 core, you get 2.4GHz. And then there's the six core which is 3.33 GHz!! Which of those is faster and why? I don't want to spend $1000 more for more cores if it's actually a slower processor

View 5 Replies View Related

MacBook Pro :: C2D Faster Then I7?

Aug 12, 2010

After watching this video im shocked and in aww. C2D Faster then i7

View 2 Replies View Related

OS X :: Make Safari Faster?

Oct 17, 2010

I did work out that one reason I don't get anywhere close to the so called 8-9 h battery life on my i5 MBP is that I use Opera as my Browser. Even though I force the Intel GPU it seems with Safari the battery estimate looks a lot better (still only at minimum Brightness it reaches 8-9h and never on 50% birghtness as Apple says).

But since I only use the Touchpad and not a mouse to control the Browser I thought that the more important stuff Safari should be able to do too at least as a mobile browser.

I put some gestures in BetterTouchTool (same as for Opera). (i.e. single tiptap for back and forward, twofinger tiptab to switch tabs, threefingerswipe up/down to open and close tabs, in short I imitate the mouse gestures I am used to.

a. What is the best way to port my bookmarks? And (optional) is there any reasonable way for syncing?
I use Opera Link for all my different PCs, OSs and it works brilliantly because all I have to do after a reinstall is typ in name and password and everything is setup in seconds. I never used mobile me and do not really intend to do so, as it costs and I don't benefit from any family license, and I don't feel the need for any other mobile me feature. It is simply a little overpriced for simple syncronisation.

b. How do I change(not add) short cuts? I found a page for all the safari short cuts and there are many of them. I don't really like some of them though. One of the reasons I think Opera is superior to most other browser are the single key short cuts. They are off by default because they would most likely confuse anybody who doesn't know about them but they make everything more efficient.

The most important being all though it is a default setting and not really a single key short cut is the . instead of CMD+F and Enter instead of CMD+J. And I'd like some single key for CMD+G. I don't know how to change it in Safari and if I change it globally somehow it probably wouldn't work, because it is important for this kind of shortcuts to differntiate between a I am just writing something state and the I am not typing anything but want to control the browser state. It is my understanding only the browser can really do that.

The reason is simple and being that it works so much faster. In Opera with mouse gestures you can do almost anything with the mouse and never have to lift a finger to get most things done where Safari often needs a cmd+click or whatever. And you can navigate expecially big sites faster than they are loaded only by keyboard. Press "." some String and Enter to get to a certain menu item and klick it. CMD+F a String CMD+J is as weird as it may sound to some, just worlds slower. It gets even worse if you only have one hand free to do the same task.

I truly never really understood this whole speed thing with browser because loading speed is rarely an issue if you have a fast connection. IMO it is all about the time you need to get to where you want to be.

c. code/abreviation/shortcuts for search engines? That should be fairly easy because you can easily teach it to Firefox, but I don't know how. In Opera again only stupid people use this search box. The one you click and select a search engine and than typ something and press enter. Most people just use a short cut for the search engine and typ in the normal address bar. Like you typ "maps London" and it opens google maps and zooms to London. The same works for pretty much anything and is brilliant because you can search in the german and english wikipedia by only slightly different short cuts. It is slow to first having to use the mouse to select the search engine, then go back to the keyboard and typ something. Who does that?
In fact with out this search box nonsense you get a real simple gui. I have the fit to width button and the address field and thats all you really need in Opera.

In FF you can go to manage your searches and put codes in and works the same as in Opera. It is more difficult to set up but it works. I guess in Safari it should work too and Safari would give me about an extra hour of battery life or more as the estimate is telling me when I CMD+Q Opera. No Idea what Opera is doing when it ain't doing anything.

View 1 Replies View Related







Copyrights 2005-15 www.BigResource.com, All rights reserved