Parallels desktop black screen - Crack Key For U

December 28, 2021 / Rating: 4.9 / Views: 515

Related Images "Parallels desktop black screen - Crack Key For U" (15 pics):

Pizza versus flatbread Live. Laugh. Cook.

There is visibly a lot to realize about this. I think you made certain good points in features also. try this out February 20, 2020 at pm 1 year ago I think other web site proprietors should take this website as an model, very clean and great user genial style and design, as well as the content.

Pizza versus flatbread Live. Laugh. Cook.
Parallels allows you to run Windows and Mac applications side by side. Choose your view to make Windows invisible while still using its applications, or keep the familiar Windows background and controls on your Mac. As far as virtualizing Windows on AS (Apple Silicon), the current state of affairs is fine and presumably will improve, as @Derekcurrie pointed out. What is really disappointing looking forward is the very poor support to date for virtualizing mac OS (Parallels and Fusion). Once Apple drops making Intel versions of mac OS, unless there is a major improvement in mac OS VMs (AS) support, if you need to do software testing, are we back to the days of having to keep actual mac hardware around with different mac OSs installed? Multiboot on one mac is not really an option because you really need concurrent access to your working environment and the testing environment, for quick testing and feedback. I have it running Windows 11 ARM Insider Preview with no major problems. It works fine, no crashing or security concerns evident). I'm running old Windows x86 (Intel) software, including games, at decent speeds. I've had no troubles adjusting to Windows 11 changes. Parallels has done a very nice job, highly recommended. It is ONE product, shipped as an Universal app; you don't have to worry about ordering the Intel or M1 version of Parallels separately. The one reason that keeps me using Boot Camp (I own the latest version of Parallels) is that you'll still have the booted Mac OS taking up a lot of RAM. On Intel Macs it runs basically unchanged as it has for the past few years. When I boot into Windows X via Boot Camp, only Windows X is using of July 12, 2021, the info on this page is seriously out of date and incomplete. you can install Intel versions of Windows, mac OS and Linux. On M1 Macs, you can ONLY install ARM-based operating systems. This includes Windows ARM (which you have to get from Microsoft by signing up with the Windows Insider program. At this time, Parallels does NOT support installing a guest version of Big Sur on M1 Macs. So if you have an M1 Mac and wanted to run mac OS guest virtual machines, not possible at this time; stick with an Intel Mac. As for Windows on M1, it is not the Windows Intel version everyone is familiar with, it is Windows ARM. It will run ARM based versions of Windows software fine; it can also run Intel Windows apps, but does so in emulation mode. In other words, if you are trying to run an old Windows Intel app, you would be running this in emulation, on Windows ARM, which is running virtualized under Big Sur, on a M1 Mac. The reviews I have read all say that amazingly, because the M1 is so fast and efficient, running Windows Intel apps under Windows ARM emulation, then virtualized, is not that bad, no worse than say running it on a ARM based Surface Pro. My personal opinion (I've been using Parallels, VMWare Fusion since the early 2000's.). If running a Windows app is mission critical for your business, go buy a used, refurbished Intel PC for under $500. And in many cases, if you're a business, you already have old Windows boxes lying around. I have Windows 10 running on 10 year old laptop with 4 GB of RAM just fine, just be sure to replace the old hard drive with an SSD. Then log into the PC remotely from your Mac using any of a dozen Mac based Remote Desktop apps. Microsoft can provide arm based versions of their Windows apps if they want, but IMO, running Microsoft apps is not the main reason Mac users want/need to run Windows ...it's that 10 year old accounting program, or custom built app that your company runs on that needs to be supported. Most current, popular business software (like Office, Adobe, Quickbooks) already comes in Mac and Windows versions which are basically feature identical. No, that's not the problem, it's the old software that's discontinued, no longer supported or upgraded, running on Windows 7 or XP that so many businesses still use. Until Microsoft makes clear what the road map for Windows ARM is, AND until Qualcomm can actually make an ARM chip that can compete with Apple Silicon, I would avoid investing any more $$ into Parallels. The licensing is an all together separate issue; for now you can get Windows ARM for free by signing up as an Insider. If Microsoft and Qualcomm get serious about ARM, you can bet eventually Windows ARM will no longer be free, so when you start adding up Total Cost of Ownership, using an old PC box and spare Windows license you have already lying around, looks very attractive. The fact that Parallels has even come this far supporting Windows ARM is impressive technical, no doubt, but the company had no choice; once Apple discontinues Intel versions of mac OS (probably the os that comes after Monterey will be the last Intel release), Parallels would be out of business unless they came up with an answer to Apple Silicon. the question is whether the demand to run Windows and Linux ARM based, on Apple Silicon is strong enough to maintain the business once Intel Macs disappear? VMWare, the company, is in a different position, its business model isn't dependent on selling Fusion, in fact Fusion at best breaks even or makes a modest profit. Parallels is desperate and should be; if there is no sustainable business model for ARM based virtualization of Windows and Linux, the company is done once Apple mac OS stops supporting Intel Macs.purchased v 16. for my macbook Pro 15 inch 2017 with latest mojave OS. tried all recommended steps (several odd Terminal commands, reinsatallition with recovery mode etc etc- nothing helped. They should honestly admit that v 16 does not work with Mojave! I will cancel the order So, Parallels is showing off a Technical Preview of the Parallels that can run the ARM version of Windows on Apple Silicon apps. Most annoying the recommended last option: upgrade to Catalina.... I've tried it, it works, for the most part, still a lot of work to do, but interesting. It's a proof of concept, the bigger issue is, will running the ARM version Windows satisfy people who want to run Windows on a Apple Silicon Mac, because Windows ARM still has it's own issues even on official Windows hardware like the Surface Pro. Lingering application issues, emulation of Intel, problems running older 32-bit Intel apps (under emulation). Even still the, it's actually quite amazing that it can be done, that a 32/64-bit Intel Windows app can run under emulation on a ARM version of Windows built for Qualcomm's ARM chip, running as a Virtual Machine on a Apple Mac with a Apple designed ARM processor Ignore negative reviews about Parallels Desktop. I use Parallels Desktop Pro for Mac, and after the recent 16.1.1 update things still run smoothly. Now, it takes much longer for the VM to start and restart, much like a normal hard disk. Furthermore, this latest update improved on the handling of memory. In earlier releases of versions 15 and 16 I noticed heavy memory usage, but that is becoming less of an issue. I do wish Parallels didn't use memory unless it actually needed to use it, then allow mac OS to reclaim it, just the way mac OS does. Maybe, I do not know the limitations of a virtual machine, but in my mind just because a certain amount of memory is allocated to a virtual machine in the virtual machine settings doesn't mean the virtual machine should use all of it 100% of the time. Yet, even with this issue, Parallels Desktop Pro is extremely stable. For those of us holding on to our older Macs we are grateful to have it. Wishing you good health and greater success in the future! To be honest it worked for awhile but the Mac mouse and keyboard drivers became corrupted and I could never download again. I found I could get away without a Windows machine and never followed up. It was a great idea but became Parallels 16 (P16) and Fusion 12 (F12) are now released. F12 standard (now called Player) version cost; now free for personal use. P16 standard cost $79, even for students and home use. F12 Pro cost $149 one time, and that includes THREE licenses, cross-platform (licenses good on Fusion for Mac or Workstation for Windows or Linux). P16 Pro cost $99 PER YEAR, one license per computer. In other words, P16 has not changed its pricing structure with the new release. Vm Ware has significantly lowered TCO with latest release. Apple Silicon (AS) is coming; the expert consensus is that virtualizing (not to be confused with emulating) Windows, which is Intel based, will be basically impossible on AS based Macs. Emulation MAY be possible, but we don't know enough yet about performance, etc, to understand how it would work and how WELL, and if any 3rd party vendor care enough to put in the resources to even overcome the technical hurdles to build an Intel emulation product over AS. So, in other words, Vmware recognizes the run for Desktop virtualization is over in the next year or so, and is rewarding its user base by lowering cost to help ease them through a transition, at the same time keeping them up to date and running on the current Intel based Macs for as long as users want or keep their Intel Macs. Parallels has opted to continue to charge (milk) its users by NOT reducing cost of ownership, even knowing that this is an End of Life product scenario for Parallels Desktop as we know it. Understandable, because unlike Vmware, outside of Parallels Desktop Mac, they don't have other products or solutions advanced or established enough to offset the lost of revenue as need for P Desktop declines in the next few years. They have to milk the cow when it is the only cow you have, while they can. VMware has firmly established alternative technologies once Fusion for Desktop is gone (cloud based and application virtualization), they have a firmly established product line(s) and business in Enterprise. They can and will continue to support Workstation for Windows and Linux. Parallels has a steep hill to climb if tries to compete with VMware in the cloud and server based solutions for Enterprise, because it has to first establish a consistent MATURE technology solution on Intel hardware geared towards Enterprise and cloud and server based solutions. If you are personal, home user, F12 makes more sense right now than buying or upgrading to P16, considering that virtualizing Windows on Intel Macs will decline as Intel Macs grow old and are eventually replaced by AS based Macs; in fact if you are already using Fusion 11 and don't mind sticking with Mojave on your Intel Mac for another year or two, there's no reason to upgrade to F12 unless you need one of the new features (Direct X 11? The money you would put down the drain for a new or continued SUBSCRIPTION to Parallels, OR to upgrade F11 to F12, you could apply towards a decent refurb Windows PC box and run Windows natively. It is ridiculously easy and affordable to buy quality refurb Windows boxes; I don't mean low end either, i7 cpus only 2 or 3 generations back. For most SMBs that are Mac shops but still need Windows application access, that is probably the solution for the future, get an inexpensive used Windows box, stick it in the corner and access on a network with Remote Desktop, Citrix or any of a dozen remote methods. That's my two cents, and I'm not a Parallels hater or Vmware shill; in the last 20 years I've used and recommended both; personally, to co-workers and to clients, to the tune of thousands of dollars in Parallels 16 (P16) and Fusion 12 (F12) are now released. F12 standard (now called Player) version cost; now free for personal use. P16 standard cost $79, even for students and home use. F12 Pro cost $149 one time, and that includes THREE licenses, cross-platform (licenses good on Fusion for Mac or Workstation for Windows or Linux). P16 Pro cost $99 PER YEAR, one license per computer. In other words, P16 has not changed its pricing structure with the new release. Vm Ware has significantly lowered TCO with latest release. Apple Silicon (AS) is coming; the expert consensus is that virtualizing (not to be confused with emulating) Windows, which is Intel based, will be basically impossible on AS based Macs. Emulation MAY be possible, but we don't know enough yet about performance, etc, to understand how it would work and how WELL, and if any 3rd party vendor care enough to put in the resources to even overcome the technical hurdles to build an Intel emulation product over AS. So, in other words, Vmware recognizes the run for Desktop virtualization is over in the next year or so, and is rewarding its user base by lowering cost to help ease them through a transition, at the same time keeping them up to date and running on the current Intel based Macs for as long as users want or keep their Intel Macs. Parallels has opted to continue to charge (milk) its users by reducing cost of ownership, even knowing that this is an End of Life product scenario for Parallels Desktop as we know it. Understandable, because unlike Vmware, outside of Parallels Desktop Mac, they don't have other products or solutions advanced or established enough to offset the lost of revenue as need for P Desktop declines in the next the next few years. They have to milk the cow when it is the only cow you have, while they can. VMware has firmly established alternative technologies once Fusion for Desktop is gone (cloud based and application virtualization), they have a firmly established product line(s) and business in Enterprise. They can and will continue to support Workstation for Windows and Linux. Parallels has a steep hill to climb if tries to compete with VMware in the cloud and server based solutions for Enterprise, because it has to first establish a consistent MATURE technology solution on Intel hardware geared towards Enterprise and cloud and server based solutions. If you are personal, home user, F12 makes more sense right now than buying or upgrading to P16, considering that virtualizing Windows on Intel Macs will decline as Intel Macs grow old and are eventually replaced by AS based Macs; in fact if you are already using Fusion 11 and don't mind sticking with Mojave on your Intel Mac for another year or two, there's no reason to upgrade to F12 unless you need one of the new features (Direct X 11? The money you would put down the drain for a new or continued SUBSCRIPTION to Parallels, OR to upgrade F11 to F12, you could apply towards a decent refurb Windows PC box and run Windows natively. It is ridiculously easy and affordable to buy quality refurb Windows boxes; I don't mean low end either, i7 cpus only 2 or 3 generations back. For most SMBs that are Mac shops but still need Windows application access, that is probably the solution for the future, get an inexpensive used Windows box, stick it in the corner and access on a network with Remote Desktop, Citrix or any of a dozen remote methods. Upgrade: $49.99 - - PLUS you get $1025 worth of additional software. That's my two cents, and I'm not a Parallels hater or Vmware shill; in the last 20 years I've used and recommended both, personal and to clients, to the tune of thousands of dollars in licenses.prl-tools-mac.iso). You might not be able to see ANY shared folders or be able to drag and drop (because there are no tools installed, duh). [1] Mind Manager 12 ($200) [2] Twist (1 yr, $300) [3] 1Password Families ($60) [4] Parallels Access ($20) [5] Datal Rescue 5 ($100) [6] Hype 4 Professional ($100) [7] Intego Mac Internet Security X9 ($50, I recommend! That means it supports nearly all 3D games and more on Windows. ] Part of the problem was waiting for Apple Metal API support. I logged on to my host via the network and copied the ISO to the root of the hard drive in my host, then I could see it inside the Catalina VM. It's not an app I use a lot - I install other Mac OS's rather than any ghastly Windows nonsense, which I did in the past - but Parallels is much improved and Parallels Toolbox offers genuinely useful tools. ) [8] Roxio Toast 18 Titanium ($100) [9] Parallels Toolbox (Mac & Windows, $20) [10] PDFpen 11 ($75) - - I'm posting this because most bundles these days suck. (I'm not affiliated with any of these companies, BTW. - - Q: Do Virtual Box or VMWare support Direct X 11 yet? But seeing as Parallels has figured it out, I suspect they'll catch up soon. Open the ISO, install Parallels Tools, reboot, and you should now have multiple resolutions available (in addition to all the other functionality that Tools provides). We've been waiting for this for many, many years. I just bought the upgrade license with the blackfriday discount. Nowhere that I could find is this mention ANYWHERE on the Parallels support site (though it will be shortly). I tested ( once again ) VMware Fusion and parallels: For me, parallels is really better. For this glaring oversight on behalf of Parallels, I rate this version low. On every new release, my version (v11) got slower and slower. More customization options of sharing between OS'es, and it performs better. Direct3D 12 support requires the vkd3d library, and a Vulkan-capable graphics card."Meanwhile, we've been making requests to Parallels, VMWare and Oracle for YEARS to implement Direct X 11 and 12 capability, with no likelihood of it ever happening. Guys, The following article sheds light on why Virtualization systems have not been able to solve the Direct X 11 and higher problem. Although, it's quite expensive for a home usage. And yet, the WINE project figured out how to do it. https:// Now Apple has made no secret that it is deprecating support for Open GL, that Metal is the future. I try to upgrade only every 2-3y when it's possible. But Metal would seem NOT to have the necessary APIs or mapping to solve the problem either, as Metal 1.0 has been around since 2014 and Metal 2.0 since mid-2017, plenty of time for Fusion, Parallels, etc, to figure out Direct X 11 support, ASSUMING Metal 2.0 was capable of solving the issues. A comment of annoyance: If you check out the release notes for WINE v4.0 you'll find:"What's new in Wine 4.0. So, it would seem Metal 2.0 is still lacking something. I'm not a graphics expert, but my understanding is that Vulkan is possibly the answer to a lot of these cross platform graphics support issues. Metal and DX sitting on top of Vulkan would provide a bridge, across multiple OS platforms; the graphics version of the 'write once, run anywhere' idea. If you're wondering, Parallels Desktop 13.3.2 works fine in Mojave. You don't need to pay for an upgrade at this time if you don't want to. Coherence integration is so much superior to the shaky Fusion Unity view, it's not even funny. Both Parallels and VMWare Fusion are constantly bugging us for an upgrade even when the current version works OK.[this review is for version 14]: switching back to Parallels 14 after moving to Fusion 8, 10 post Parallels 12. The entire experience is a lot smoother (on 2018 i9 MBP with 32GB RAM), more responsive, and has more integration options. Network performance to local/Mac host folders is 100x faster, no delays (unlike Fusion). Only downside: More expensive for the Pro version on the annual subscription, and doesn't cover two machines like Fusion (but worth it). When I bought my i Mac back at the end of 2015, I bought the Parallels version of it. It slowed down my computer to the degree that everything crashed despite adjusting settings to make it fast. I quit using Parallels and decided to use my mac functionality of Bootcamp. I wish also that I could get a refund for my money. I'm tired of believing companies that software sometimes it works and sometimes it does not. This is probably one of the easiest VM applications to use. Sadly, their pricing is absolutely terrible and greedy. If they don't take care of their pricing, they will probably lose in the long run. After a frustrating experience with VMWare after paying for and spending the best part of a weekend trying to get their their latest version upgrade installed on my Mac Pro Desktop, only to find out after installation it is incompatible with my processor, I emailed Parallels presages questions. I switched from Parallels years ago due to poor support and customer service. So I will continue using Fusion until I get my new Mac Pro Desktop next year and then try Virtual Box. If I am not going to get decent support from either company, why should I pay for their software when open source is available? MU has a wrong, DEAD link for downloading Parallels 13.1.1: this real instead:https://download.parallels.com/desktop/v13/13.1.1-43120/Parallels Desktop-13.1.1-43120NOTES: I did research on the now DEAD and discovered that it was a nuisance marketing website that forwarded victims to another nuisance marketing site formerly called Commission Junction (Junk-tion IMHO) now called Conversant. I have purchased Parallels Desktop 12.x on June 22, 2017. Ripoff users have repeatedly reported this company as "an elaborate scam ripoff con! I contacted Parallels Customer support yesterday after having received an email announcing the availability of version 13. Since I had just purchased, I thought they would help me out to get version 13 with paying the full price again. They said that only people who've purchased on August 1st and later will get upgraded free of charge. Parallels are just a greedy bunch who don't care about loyal customers even if you've been purchasing their software since their early years. Love Parallels a must for any Mac power user or professional who uses different apps in their day some of which are only available for Windows. The rest of their customers must pay again no matter what. Let's face it there are some apps on Windows with no Mac equivalent. Parallels let's me run those special Windows apps I need without having to go to another computer or reboot my Mac into Windows. It's so convenient and powerful and saves me a ton of time and allows me to use all the tools I need. Breaks my heart, but 12.x is less problematic than VMware 8.5.x has been. Having said that, I've had to completely uninstall and reinstall Parallels after the 10.12.4 update for some reason due to an odd startup delay issue, but overall it has been a lot more functional overall with some of the bugs that seem to be creeping into VMware after the enormous layoff... If you feel enought paying 80$US every year to paralles (to 1 mac, i have 2 macs) you can try other option: cost looks like same 80$US but it's not yearly fee, and it's not per mac, you can use on multiple mac. Or can try free one virtualbox or Veertu desktop (free too) but no Mac OS guest yet Running the "Reclaim Disk Space" action on all my Windows VMs (Windows 10, 8.1, 7, Vista, XP) corrupted their disks. Using the "Reclaim Disk Space" action on mac OS or linux VMs seems to work fine. When trying to launch the VMs some of them start with "Preparing Automatic Repair" and other just present a black screen. I'm using Parallels Desktop 12 Version for Mac Pro Edition (Version 12.1.2 (41525)) on a Mac Book Pro (late 2016) running mac OS Sierra 10.12.2 (16C67). This looks like a fatal bug to me as it results in data loss. I've posted this on the Parallels forum but got not response.12.1.3 (41532) is out: This update for Parallels Desktop 12 for Mac 12.1.3 (41532) for Parallels Desktop Standard and Pro Edition addresses overall stability and performance issues, and includes the following fixes and improvements: • Resolves an issue with request to enter Mac administrator password on every Parallels Desktop start. • Resolves an issue with Problem ID 15380 on Parallels Desktop start. • Resolves and issue with mouse not working on external display after it has been reconnected • Resolves an issue with Parallels Desktop crashes when trying to print to PDF!!!! DO NOT UPGRADE TO VERSION 12.1 IF YOU HAVE A "NON RECURRING" VERSION (that is not Pro version and not Business Edition). I have Parallels Desktop Pro 12, which was won in a prize draw. IF YOU UPGRADE YOU WILL ONLY BE ABLE TO ASSIGN 8GB OF RAM TO YOUR VM's !!!! I thought that I'd be getting a standard non-Pro version, and I was disappointed that I got a professional version instead. IF YOU UPGRADE YOU WILL ONLY BE ABLE TO ALLOCATE 4CORES TO YOUR VM !!!! They already showed their greed when Mac Os X 10.11 came out, claiming that Parallels 10 would not be compatible... So they scared people urging them to upgrade when there was ABSOLUTELY no need to do so ! and this is a simple way to tell : "Give me 80€ each year". Why would I be frustrated in getting a more advanced edition, you might ask, it is because the app will stop to function within a year, as I discovered when I registered serial number on Parallels website. I want to upgrade apps at a pace of my own choosing and as such, I will not even install the app, as to not to get locked out when the time is up. Technically it is a great peace of software, it's a pity that stance on customers blows it all away, for me at least. I've used Parallels since Version 6 and it has always worked pretty well for me BUT the yearly upgrade price of $49 is becoming pretty onerous. I now wait until it is bundled with a few other apps or offered as a special on MU before buying it. Not sure if I'll be upgrading to v12, however, as v11 in conjunction with Windows 10 is working well on my mid-2011 i Mac :-)When I see Parallels appear in the daily Mac Update listings it shows as 3.5 stars. When I click on it in the listings I go to the Parallels page, where it shows at the top as half a star. I went back through all the comments/reviews for about 4 years and even 3.5 stars looks very generous indeed. If I scroll down past the ads to where the comments/reviews start I now see that the overall rating is 4 stars. I know that for many years now Parallels have been hosing their customers and I think the reviews that imply a rating over lifetime need to culled down to something like maybe 3 years. Just because every man and his dog thought Parallels was awesome back when it first came out and there wasn't really anything like it at the time bears no reflection at all on what seasoned users think of it today (after how they've been treated by Parallels). I'm a long time user and tried going to 12 but had to quickly revert to 11. I'm sure it will get resolved in a while but at the moment v12 is unusably buggy in many ways. As at 7/30/16, there is a big problem with Windows 10 activation recognizing the Virtual Machine if you're switching from using Boot Camp to Parallels, and Parallels 11 blows away your Windows license in both Parallels AND on Boot Camp if you try to point Parallels at Win 10 on Boot Camp. Go read the Parallels forums and you'll get an idea. If you're running Win 8.1 on Boot Camp, installing Parallels 11 will kill the Win 8.1 license in Parallels, but it leaves it OK on Boot Camp, so if you're dead with Win 10 in Parallels you can downgrade back to 8.1 in Boot Camp and your license will still be there. I've been told by Parallels support today that they're working on a workaround, but be sure they've fixed it before you kill your Win 10 license. They said "We apologize for the inconvenience, but this issue is caused by Windows 10 activation policies: the activation key is bounded to the hardware and as the virtual machine emulates hardware it differs from the real one reasonably enough. You're not the only one facing this issue and our Development team already works upon a workaround for this issue, but you should understand that it is a Windows licensing issue, not the Parallels one." Er, not really. It's a Parallels issue because they claim you can run Windows in their Virtual Machine, and now you can't! Every OSX they're releasing SW, which differs only in one parameter: "allowed-version-osx". Personally, I'm leaving them completely after it took me 48 hours of support calls before they 'fessed up that that they knew they had a problem. I was a parallels suporter, but the new licencing is no go, it's not an upgrade but a big downgrade, there are better less ripping user software, I have moved do VMWare, after this. No way Parallels there is replacement and I am happily using it! I got an email from Mac Update that goes like this:...... By the price of this software you can buy an infocus kangaroo and have a Windows machine allways with you. If you'd provide your piece of SW for reasonable price - I'd maybe consider. So when I criticized Mac Update for this update to Parallels being f ive weeks late in being posted here they deleted my post within a coupe of hours. We've partnered with Mac Update Community favorite Parallels to offer you 2 exclusive discounts: Parallels Desktop 11 for only $59.99 - 25% off the normal price of $79.99...... Version 11 is a rip off because it's basically version 10 minus version 11's pro features. But you f* with me once I nought in past & you're simply pricey - for NO additional value - maybe some poor other users need to use your solution, but if they'd try to search a bit - you're gonna die by hunger! Parallels Desktop 11 is ideal for home and student use, and of course, this PERPETUAL license of Parallels allows you to run Windows and Mac applications side by side...... Does this means there is no need to fork out for future upgrades ever? The current version is 11.1.2 (not 11.1.1 as listed today). Why on earth would I buy a downgraded version or pay an annual subscription to get same old features!? I've had minimal problems with Parallels 11 for my purposes. Direct X Problem: I continue to be dismayed that NO virtualization system, including Parallels, VMWare and Virtual Box, supports anything beyond Direct X v10. That knocks them all out as able to play the most recent 3D games. I´m one of those who didn´t read the licensing terms good enough. And no, the problem is NOT (necessarily) the GPU hardware of the Mac. I thought Great, I can activate and deactivate some Parallels with my Parallels account (As Microsoft beautifully do it with Office 365). The problem is bothering to code the translators to allow use of the GPU hardware on the Mac. But you are forced to BOTH log in to the account AND enter a serial number (Oh why? ) AND you are only allowed to have ONE installation?? If something fails you have to call them to reset you install counter one ONE!! In addition Parallels 11 fails to update Windows 10 when there is a new release. It freezes my computer and I have to force KILL my mac and reboot. So today I used the cross grade offer from a competitor, even if it has slightly lower 3D performance it is allowed to have it installed on my i Mac, Mac Pro and Mac Book in addition to it being more stable. Version 10 of Parallels was beautiful, so I´m a little sad to say goodbye. So goodbye Parallels, hope to see you again when you clean up your business practices and fix your instability. I decided to abandon Parallels now after being told I should be able use the PD11 trial side by side with my older PD8 installation. At no point during installation am I Informed that the PD11 Trial will delete my older installation, but that is of course the end result. The sales support were nice and helpful, but I got enough of such schemes. I don't fully understand the crticism of the yearly fees as that is optional. A comparison review of Fusion 8, Parallels 11 (and Virtual Box 5) Very interesting..many years most reviews gave PD the speed edge (especially with Windows guests), and Fusion a slight stability edge. Fusion v 7 closed the speed gap, and now Fusion 8 and PD 11 are for the most part neck and neck. With the new licensing policy of PD, it just makes it easier to switch to Fusion knowing that you are also no longer sacrificing functionality or performance in doing so. Mainly PD for Windows guests, and Fusion for OSX guests and cross compatiblity with VMWare Workstation. After PD 11 was released and the new licensing, I migrated all my PD images to Fusion and now using Fusion exclusively. So, in addition to my work laptop, I go to install Parallels on my home machine (something previously allowable given that nobody has figured out how to be in two places at the same time yet). The installation process first deletes the old version, and after you enter your license number it reports back to say it's already in use on a different computer and you're prompted to cough up another $50 or bail out and spend the time finding your old version and reinstalling that all over again. I was in a hurry preparing for something and I just had to bite the bullet and buy another (my very last) copy. The software they have may be good, but I'm certain their CEO is both an analyst and a therapist! Well after using Parallels from version ONE, I now find I am unable to use/support this product. Parallels has forced a change in licensing, our University can not buy a perpetual licence, we must now pay a 12 month "rent" for it. We are NOT going to do this, we will be shifting all of our business to VMWare instead. None of the "Pro" features are worth the extra costs, and obviously having a customer with tens/hundreds of units is of no interest to Parallels. Its incredibly easy to loose a customer, and once they have shifted, its incredibly difficult to ever get them back. So I've been playing with PD 11 and Fusion 8 for the last month now (i've been a long time user of both products for many years, and use both professionally and personally). I have a number of Macs running multiple boot partitions from Mavericks, to Yosemite and El Capitan. My observations (your mileage may vary, this is just me) is that on older hardware, PD 11 is slower than PD 10 on the same setup, where as Fusion 8 is faster than Fusion 7 on the same older hardware (old in this case is Core2 Duo macs, not Macs with i series CPUs). On newer hardware (i5's and i7's), I don't notice a difference between Fusion 8 and PD 11 (I don't use for gaming, so not commenting on graphics, just business apps performance). From a licensing perspective, it's getting harder to justify to myself, personally and professionally, to stick with PD, which is one license, one CPU, whereas Fusion is one license/three CPUs. That plus VM compatibility with VMWare Workstation for Windows, I have to give the nod to Fusion. Note this is coming from someone who has used PD primarily for his personally work the last several years, mainly just out of laziness and not wanting to spend time migrating all my VMs fusion. But now I'm switching over (for personal stuff, professionally, still using both, as clients and co-workers have a vested interest in sticking with what they have). For those concerned (IE gamers): Parallels 11 does NOT (again) support Direct X 11.*sigh* This has been an issue for years, since Direct X 11 was released. At least Parallels now says they are 'going' to support Direct X11 in Parallels Desktop 11. They suggest signing up and watching their email list for notification of when they finally catch up. I'm waiting on updating to version 11 until they, at last, get this together. BTW: VMware lags even further behind with Direct X support. For those considering switching over to Fusion, and have Windows 7 images, note that Fusion does not support USB 3.0 with Windows 7 VMs.. Parallels found a way around that; and wrote virtualized drivers. They JUST started supporting Direct X 10, which Parallels started supporting back in Parallels 10. this is true of the VMWare Workstation for Windows product as well (no support for USB 3 in virtualized Windows 7 images). VMWare has taken the high road and taken the position if USB 3 isn't supported in Windows 7 (ie NATIVE OS DRIVERS, not talking about 3rd party add on drivers from device makers, OEM's, motherboard makers, etc), then it's not supported in VWWare. Grass is not necessarily greener on the other side. For the record, I use Fusion and Parallels, so I feel I'm rather unbiased. From a feature/ functionality perspective, I find Fusion MUCH better at OS X virtualization, and Parallels better at Windows virtualization, mainly speeed, but just marginally. From a licensing perspective, i had no issues with PD through version 10, but the new PD 11 user license does have me thinking if the slightly faster speed of running Windows over Fusion is worth all the new limitations in the PD 11 user license. Bad faith: Moving Basic features to the Pro edition because "Parallel found out that basic features were well enough for users". Previous versions of Parallels allowed virtual machines with up to 16 virtual CPUs and 64GB of RAM. Now only the Pro edition can make virtual machines that big; the non-Pro edition goes up to 4 CPUs and 8GB of RAM. Virtualization for Linux guests, both available in the basic Parallels last year, are now restricted to Pro version only. Support s**ks: It's either, "well you should upgrade to the last version $$$" or simply poor recommendations. Although I've been a loyal Parallels customer since version 5 and find the software actually quite good, I can no longer recommend it. Starting with version 11, Parallels is enforcing the single-seat license in their EULA. Whereas I was always able to activate my office computer my laptop on a single license, I will now have to pay 100% more for my upgrade to Parallels 11 Pro. There is no option for reduced-price extra seats for the Pro version. These abhorrent and customer-hostile license terms are so restrictive, and the lack of any understanding or flexibility on the part of their support team, mean that I have begun the process of moving everything over to VMWare, with excellent performance, unlimited multi-seat licenses for individuals and a crossgrade offer for Parallels customers. I'll vote with my wallet, and with this well-deserve half-star for a product-destroying licensing policy. Just bought version 10 and received it about two months ago, and now there's a $50 upgrade. A while ago, VMware offered a sidegrade for users of Parallels Desktop to get the latest version of Fusion for about ten bucks; hopefully they'll offer something similar in the future. After having versions 4, 6, and 7 (and having them all stop working on me after a few OS X updates), I'm done with Parallels. Besides my feelings about Parallels' business practices, the fact is that the cost of Parallels plus a license of Windows 10 now costs as much as just buying an HP Stream (or a similar competing product). I know these low-end netbooks aren't as powerful as your Mac, but they also allow you to run Windows without affecting your Mac in any way or using any of its resources, plus they are quite portable. If you find a good enough sale, you can buy Windows-running hardware for less than the cost of Windows-running software. Seems like only yesterday I finished pulling out my wallet for a YAPU (Yet Another Parallels Upgrade) and now I see Parallels 11 is out and it's another fifty bucks to upgrade. This reminds me of the origin of the expression "daylight robbery" where property taxes were assessed by the number of windows a house had. Parallels (to me) has really just become a Windows tax :-/. There are many posts on the Net about how to install El Capitan beta into Parallels (v 10). I've tried most of them, the only one I've been successful with is here: involved, but if you follow carefully, don't try to outsmart the instructions and take shortcuts because you think "you know better", then the instructions work. And bear in mind the following, you've been told:1) the method only works with the Developer Preview of 10.11, not the Public Beta (as of the date of the article, later PUblic Beta after that may work, i don't know). 2) to successfully install Parallels Tools afterwards, you MUST disable SIP/rootless first. You can leave it off or turn it back after PT is installed, but it must be off to install PT. It is very clear after all my experimenting with the various methods to install 10.11 in Parallels, that the bootloader, install mechanism and creation of a bootable image is different in 10.11 from 10.10, which was also slightly different from 10.9. Heck , even between the Developer Preview and Public Beta of 10.11, there is apparently a difference in the booting and install mechanism, as evidenced by the fact the method referenced above only seems to work with the DP. Parallels is going to need to make some major adjustments to support painless install of 10.11, which likely means a new Parallels v.11 after El Cap ships. In anticipation of all the bemoaning about another Parallels 'forced' upgrade to support El Capitan, just keep that in mind that the devs are simply having to keep up with Apple, which continues its history of making MAJOR system level and core changes in OS X with every release since Lion, Not just the boot and installing functions, but the graphics engines, audio, video, hardware abstraction and so on. Parallels is not Text Edit, it's very sophisticated software engineering, that takes development resources to maintain and test, every time Apple makes sweeping changes across the board, all of which comes with a cost. It is not as simple as just changing the 'supported version of OS X' from 10.10 to 10.11 in a some little plist file, and shipping an update to Parallels. Even the video subsystem in El Cap seems to have been reworked again by Apple. Screen drawing with Yosemite virtual machine in PD, is slower than in Mavericks, but had improved in the latest PD 10.2.2. With El Cap, using the same video driver in Parallels Tools for Yosemite, the screen drawing is very glitchy, and slow, like it was with early Yosemite betas. I have El Cap installed natively as well on a partition, but this saves from rebooting between El Cap and my every day configuration. On the one hand, it is stable, feature rich, and fast. On the other hand, its licensing as absolutely abhorrent. While previous versions do tend to continue to work on newer OS (v.9 does work on Yosemite, etc.), when a problem arises Parallels basically tells you you need to pay to upgrade for the latest OS support. Add to the fact that it's nearly impossible to deactivate a computer once activate (installed Parallels on a Mac Book Air, activated, a few months later sold the Air and bought a Pro, couldn't get Parallels to activate since it claimed the code was already in use - took days with Parallels support to get the issue resolved), the licensing system is just terrible. With that being said, Parallels is the only VM software for Macs that supports USB 3.0 on Windows 7 (or Server 2008) - and this is an invaluable feature. I have been a paid user since version 3 through version 6, Now I can't even use the software, MAC isolated the software as a "Problem Child" now I just have to wonder, what value is this product when every time you turn around you have to pay an "upgrade" fee ? For some asinine reason, VMWare refuses to create USB 3.0 drivers for Windows 7, essentially forcing me to keep using Parallels for my VM needs. I see this as a seriously flawed and destructive business model that will certainly come back around, (Karma is a female dog) I am sick and tired of the nickel and dime (failed business model) I am moving to another platform that performs better and actually works when my operating system updates. Now that Windows 10 is out, and it seems to not completely suck, I am hopeful that I can now ditch Parallels and it's absurd licensing practices for a more sane company in VMWare (well, licensing sane, lack of USB 3 support is pretty insane...)Ai! The Parallels video driver is not signed so Windows 10 refuses to install/update today. Were mainly talking about 32 bit versus 64 bit here, so really this is a failure on the part of this product and while you may have my money you will never have me as a customer again. See also: This is known for 2 months still not solved at final release date for Windows 10...v10.2.2 update is out. If you run into a failed Parallels Tools installation, the secret is to let the virtual system reboot, then FORCE install Parallels Tools AGAIN. You may get a screwy screen resolution, although mine reset itself back to normal. I have to give Parallels high marks this time around. (o_0) You have to reboot your virtual drive a second time. I had been putting off upgrading because, frankly, I don't need it yet. But I got an e-mail offer for $10 off the usual upgrade price of $49.99; so I paid only $39.99. While 8 still works in Mavericks, I thought this was the best price I'd ever be likely to find on a Toast upgrade. What's more, they had a companion offer for Toast 12 Titanium for $29.99, which is half the standard upgrade price for Toast. As it turns out, the one I got, version 12, isn't the latest – version 14 was just released – but it's still four versions newer than the one I was using. What really got me posting here was the ease with which I was able to create a Windows 7 virtual machine in Parallels 10 by converting my VMWare Fusion Windows 7 virtual machine; the process left the Fusion virtual machine undisturbed. It went as smooth as you-know-what through a goose. I had been worried about installing Windows 7 in Parallels given that I am already using my Windows 7 license in Fusion – Microsoft licensing policies set the standard for being difficult to deal with (I have been running Windows XP in Parallels. But there were no issues when I started up Windows 7 in Parallels 10 - though it took me awhile to get the settings where I want them. And Parallels started up in Coherence mode by default, which was a nuisance till I figured out what was going on and turned Coherence off. The only other issue I had was getting the USB 3 drivers for Windows, but Parallels had a link for that in the USB settings. I'm running OS X Mavericks on a 27" i Mac with a 1TB Fusion drive, so there's plenty of room for the extra VM. Eventually I plan to upgrade to Windows 10 in VMWare Fusion since Microsoft will be offering it for free for a year. And yes, I have the requisite Windows 7 license to qualify for the free Windows 10 offer. In the meantime, I've skipped Windows 8 altogether because, in my opinion, it's more trouble than it's worth. You may be asking, why am I using both Parallels and Fusion? Well, I bought Parallels at an introductory discount when it first came out. But a version or two on it became unreliable so I decided to give VMWare Fusion a try, also at an introductory discount. I had XP in Parallels and originally put Vista in Fusion – though I had to install XP there because my copy of Vista was an upgrade, not a standalone. I moved that to Windows 7 because Win 7 couldn't easily be installed over XP. Now, of course, I could put Win 10 in either program. ;-) But I'll continue my policy of running two versions of Windows. Nowadays I could run all my VMs in either app, but they keep leapfrogging one another in feature development so I've never been able to decide to stick with one or the other. And my early experience with Parallels made me wary of putting all my eggs in one basket. They've both gone haywire at one time or another. So, for now, I'll give Parallels 10 five stars. YMMVYMMV, but I've seen a noticeable improvement in speed and 'snappiness' with the 10.2.0 upgrade from the previous 10.1, across all VMs (Windows 10, 8, 7, XP; OS X Yosemite, Mavericks). With the Windows 7 VM, which is also installed on Bootcamp on the same machine, it feels virtually native in terms of response. The VM is allocated 2GB RAM on and 1 CPU, on a quad core i Mac with 8 GB of RAM, so saying it runs basically as good as the native Windows in Bootcamp which has access to all 8GB and all cores, is saying something. Again, YMMV, I don't run games, so can't speak for raw graphics or 3D acceleration speed, but things like Word and Excel 2013 load and respond quicker in the VM now. Stick with the previous version until Parallels get their act together. Using the update feature in Parallels 10, I updated to 10.2.0 and all hell broke loose. I ended up with a barely working, messed up Windows XP Pro. Among the problems inflicted by this poorly planned update: 1) Windows freaked out that Parallels Tools had installed a bad disk driver. 2) This caused the Parallels Tools installation to FAIL. 3) Upon forced reboot, the Windows XP display settings were ruined. Windows warned me of the problem and tried to help me get a better picture. I tried and found the desktop image resolution was still awful. 4) Then Window freaked again, telling me: "A problem occurred during hardware installation. Your new hardware might not work properly." And it didn't. I wrote to them further about my solution, which was to: 1) Manually download the full installer for 10.2.0. 3) Watch the Parallels Tools installer mess up AGAIN. So I wrote Parallels support in detail about the mess they had inflicted. 4) Reboot Windows XP and run Parallels Tools installer a SECOND time. This time the resolution problem cleared up and all looks fine. For putting me through this abysmal update and wasting my time, Parallels earns 2 stars in this review.

2017-2018 © chinamake.us
Sitemap