VM Fusion 2 better than Parallels 3?

[Durbrow]

Two things for anyone following this thread. I could be wrong but it seems that the VM Fusion 2 Beta does NOT import Parallel-installed Window XP setups. From what I gleaned from the Communities board, the VM Importer does not work for the 2.0 beta. Nor does importing Parallel installed setups from within the beta work. That means that if you are hoping to compare VM Fusion 2 with your version of Parallel you have to reinstall XP from scratch. (Gia & Others: Is this correct).

Second, it seems that Parallel pricing has gone down on Amazon. The full version of 3.0 is now $40 US with rebate. Ironically, the UPGRADE is still $50. Go figure.

[Viro]

If you want virtualization on the cheap (i.e. for free) you can give VirtualBox a go. It's been bought out by Sun, so things can only get better!

[aicul]

One unfortunate aspect of VMware is that the virtual machine file cannot be archived using tie machine.

[ian_k]

does fusion let you boot froma boot camp partition? i read somewhere it does

[motsteve]

Why would you use BootCamp at all if you have Fusion or Parallels? I run Leopard, XP Pro, Fedora, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Suse, Mandriva and Debian Linux with no Boot Camp anywhere but in the bit bucket. I'm doing electronic simulations on XP Pro and it doesn't slow down or even cough a little. If there's a speed problem I surely don't see it, but then again, I don't play games.

[ian_k]

i suppose with vm/parallels u can assign a specific system setup to make it as good a spec as u need

good ram size would be a must though

[motsteve]

I would recommend at least 3G of ram on your mac although you can get by with less. It's so cheap, the question is why should you settle for less?

[ian_k]

i agree, 4gb seems norm nowdays