- #PARALLELS OR VMWARE FUSION FOR MAC DRIVERS#
- #PARALLELS OR VMWARE FUSION FOR MAC SOFTWARE#
- #PARALLELS OR VMWARE FUSION FOR MAC PC#
- #PARALLELS OR VMWARE FUSION FOR MAC MAC#
Still shopping for best pricing on XP OS.Īs you shop, keep in mind the difference between OEM and retail versions. The freezes I know about (that have been diagnosed) are pretty much all Apple bugs.
![parallels or vmware fusion for mac parallels or vmware fusion for mac](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/CUHrVydnYM0/maxresdefault.jpg)
My guess is that 1 GB total should be fine for light work in XP I would give XP at most 256 MB.
#PARALLELS OR VMWARE FUSION FOR MAC MAC#
I have 1GB on my mac mini and believe I should be ok, however I have read that XP freezes a lot in fusion. Yep, as long as you've installed VMware Tools, this should work in Windows and Linux (possibly others, but I'm not sure).
#PARALLELS OR VMWARE FUSION FOR MAC PC#
If it's a USB device, I would expect it to work.Īlso if I can drag and drop files both ways from pc to mac and vice versa. I don't recall hearing any reports of users experience with Dymo label printers.
#PARALLELS OR VMWARE FUSION FOR MAC DRIVERS#
I've run off both large capacity 7200rpm drives and small 5400rpm passport drives with no problems.I would like to know if Fusion supports Dymo Labelprinter drivers and if in fact they work? Running VMs off of a local drive can really kill performance as you can end with contention with the main OS. My work VMs tend to have 1GB to 1.5GB allocated, and again, they run well with VMware Fusion.Īlso, if you're going to run VMs, put them on an external hard drive, as, since that'll help with drive access. I run a simple Windows XP VM with 512MB and that runs great. Also, as brendanjerwin mentions, memory is important. In terms of performance, I'd say the VM's tend to run slightly faster on Mac than on PC. I use VMware Fusion daily at home and I picked it mainly because at work I use Windows hardware running VMware Workstation and any virtual machines it uses, I can easily use in VMWare Fusion. I've not had a great deal of experience with Parallels so can't really compare it with VMware Fusion. Either way you go, be sure to use the snapshot features! Happened 3 times in the past week, having to reinstall everything multiple times. If this anecdotal evidence is worth anything, on OS X 10.5.6 and VMware Fusion 2.0.4 I have been having major Windows Server 2003 file system corruption and OS X kernel panics.
#PARALLELS OR VMWARE FUSION FOR MAC SOFTWARE#
On another note, you won't find any benchmark stats comparing VM software because VMware's licenses forbid the posting of benchmark stats without their permission. Otherwise you can use Parallels, or may I suggest? Parallels and Virtualbox tend to have better performance than VMware across all platforms that I have used (Virtualbox: Linux, Windows, OS X) (Parallels: OS X).
![parallels or vmware fusion for mac parallels or vmware fusion for mac](https://news-cdn.softpedia.com/images/news2/039-Virtual-039-Wars-Parallels-Desktop-4-0-VS-VMware-Fusion-2-0-2-2.jpg)
Originally I went with Parallels since it was the first. I've used each and currently use Parallels. For example, vmrun can start, stop, snapshot and do various other things with a VM. For VMWare, inside the app bundle there's a load of tools that can be used to do everything that you can do in the GUI (/Applications/VMware Fusion.app/Contents/Library).