A Mac Question

[Whaler]

I recently upgraded to Leopard, thanks to the answers to the upgrade question I posted here, and I am very happy with it.

Now I am interested in installing Windows so I can run some of the wife's software. Has anyone installed Windows XP using only Boot Camp or have you installed Parallels or Fusion?

Would I be better off leaving it alone and using her computer when I need a Windows application?

[crokett]

Would I be better off leaving it alone and using her computer when I need a Windows application?

That is what I would do. I would set up whatever protocol you need to share files so you can save any files you create on your computer though.

[JSUPreston]

I would leave well enough alone, if reasonable. However, the answer to your question depends upon what you want to do under XP. If you're looking at gaming or video intensive apps, I would look at using Boot Camp. If you're talking about stuff like Word, Excel, accounting apps, etc., you'd probably be fine with one of the emulators.

Just my $.02 worth, which adjusted for inflation, is worth nothing.

[Anna]

We use Parallels with Tiger with great success, but I'm not sure how well it works with Leopard. My friend, whose new iMac (with Leopard) I helped set up, is currently using Fusion, and he loves it. Either emulator is really convenient and works well. We thought about Boot Camp, but it's the hassle of having to shut down the computer and reboot that discouraged us if we only need the occasional Windows program.

Lastly, have you looked for an equivalent Mac version for your wife's software?

[Copper]

I have an iMac G5 with Leopard and have Parallels and Boot Camp installed. The advantage of running Parallels is that you can have both Windows and Apple programs running at the same time and copy and paste text from one to the other. I have not had any problems running Parallels. However, it does slow down my computer noticeably. Therefore, I only fire it up when I need to. Windows programs do not run as quickly either. So, if you're doing something that is processor intensive (gaming, photo/movie editing), you might want to use Boot Camp to run the software.

[JSUPreston]

Copper, I'm confused. The G5 was a Motorola processor. How are you able to do Boot Camp on it and run Windows successfully, since Windows uses x86 compatible processors?

[Bruce Cohen]

Dick,

As a long time Mac user, maybe 20 years or so, and as a graphic designer usually in a large ad agency, I found it best not to dilute the value of a Mac with "lousy" Microsoft coded products.

Waaay too much that can go wrong. Which isn't to say that Macs are perfect either. I'm still not going to migrate to Leopard till at least the fourth or fifth revision. Too many different configurations exist of each persons Mac for Apple to get all the gremlins out of the system software, and as I use my Macs for business, I can't take the time to troubleshoot every weird glitch that comes up. Its better to let others be the beta (un-paid) testers.

With the above in mind, imagine the possibilities that can (and do) arize when one adds some totally alien code (like Microsoft sucks) into a fragile OS (Mac).

IMHO, as my late mother used to say "Leave well enough alone" and don't make computing a chore, it should be as easy as possible. Remember, you don't need a million large books to teach you how to use a pencil.

Keeping both machines (don't install Vista, no matter what) seperate, but networked will give you the ability to run PC software, like just about all "real" CAD programs without the added additional problens added by trying to force them to work on the Mac.

Hope this makes some sense, and gives you a clearer direction to go in. Just remember, this my subjective opinion, and you will find many others that will say differently.

Bruce

[burrellski]

I have a new mac with Leopard and wanted to use BootCamp to install XP so I could run Solidworks on it. I got a resounding "NO" from everyone that I spoke with. Maybe it works ok with less intensive apps though.

[tedkitch]

Bruce, by using Parallels or VMWare Fusion you do not dilute your Mac with anything. All of the Microsoft programs run inside of a virtual machine.

Burrellski, you may want to contact VMWare regarding their Fusion product. The latest release supports DirectX v9 for some products.

As far as what to do goes, it is all a matter of preference. There are many programs that cannot run inside of a virtual machine and many others that will work just fine. I've been using Parallels since it first came out and the program is awesome. The only complaints that I have about it are that it doesn't support USB 2.0 in the virtual machine and it only virtualizes one processor, even though the host machine has two. When the Fusion product came out I purchased it also and it does support USB 2.0 and two processors. Another interesting thing that I do with Fusion is that I have a virtual machine that I installed to an 8GB flash drive that I take with me. I run Vista at work and Leopard at home, but I have a common XP installation on my flash drive that I can run at either location.

Boot camp is cool, but it isn't always fun to have to shut down OS X to boot into Windows. Coherence and Unity modes in Parallels and Fusion (respectively) are awesome. You can run Windows applications directly on your desktop in OS X. Both programs have recent updates that contain full Leopard support and IMHO you can't go wrong with either of them.

If you have any other questions regarding either program, let me know.

[bigstick509]

I've got Leopard on my wifes iMac and my MBP and both are using VMWare Fusion. She is using a Bootcamp partition and a virtual machine of XP using Fusion. On my MBP its XP in bootcamp and Vista in Fusion. I believe that the virtual machines that Fusion is running are about 90% as fast as straight install version. No problems so far, so I would say you would be fine going the bootcamp route and or the VMWare Fusion way.

[leehljp]

I have been using Parallels and XP since June of '06 on my 2 year old MBPro. About 10 of my co-workers use Parallels with XP.
5 others have fusion with 3 running XP and 2 running Vista. This group and 4 of the Parallels group switched from PCs in the past year.

Only one switcher had the same amount of problems with running Windows as before switching. The rest say that they have less hardware problems and conflicts (?) than on their PC computers. Bear in mind that these folks have to operate in a Japanese language OS environment, which is more complicated overall.

[Copper]

Copper, I'm confused. The G5 was a Motorola processor. How are you able to do Boot Camp on it and run Windows successfully, since Windows uses x86 compatible processors?

Sorry, I guess I shouldn't have said G5. That's what I used to have and I got very sick of running Windows-only software for work using Virtual PC (I didn't have to use it that often). I just got this one about 6 months ago. The new iMacs have an Intel Core 2 Duo. I got the 24" screen and I have people stopping in my office to comment on the nice monitor I have. I smirk as I say, "Well, that's actually the whole computer." Every one of them says, "Really?!?"

[lkazista]

Fusion seems much more stable than Parallels, IMHO.

I generally find myself booting into Windows directly when I need something on that side.

Download the 30 day trial and see if you find yourself using it first.

Lee

[leehljp]

Fusion seems much more stable than Parallels, IMHO.

I generally find myself booting into Windows directly when I need something on that side.

Download the 30 day trial and see if you find yourself using it first.

Lee

Lee,

How or in what way is it more stable? Have you tried both? The reason I am asking it that I have been totally surprised at how stable Parallels is with XP. I had XP Pro on my IBM ThinkPad bought a month before they sold out to Lenovo, and that XP had its problems. Not as much as on other PCs but much more that I have ever had on Parallels. My parallels XP is faster than the Thinkpad is/was too. My daughter now has it and she says it has some quirks, but not as much as her school system PCs.

The point is, I have never had a crash on Parallels XP, even when I was running beta Parallels almost 2 years ago. Smooth as melted butter. I did have a little problem getting it set up to wireless printing but when I did print out a copy of the set up procedure on the Mac side and follow it to the "T", the the WiFi hooked up printer worked flawlessly from Parallels XP, and has for the last 18 months.

When I upgraded to Leopard, everything transferred just fine and never skipped a beat in the XP running.

[Wood_workur]

I would go with parallels if you feel the need to run it on that computer, or just have file sharing enabled between the two computers if that is all you need. (I've done the file sharing before and its really easy to setup.)