Using Boot Camp and VMWare Fusion together

[Atsushi]

Unfortunately I need more and more but still run Windows programs and am now on VMware Fusion. But I had a few questions:

1. Make a MBP with 4GB 2010 Ram more of a Windows 7 32bit or 64 bit Windows 7 sense? Because Windows and Mac OS have to share the 4 GB Ram but makes a 64 bit Windows does not make sense, since it needs 64bit innately more memory, right?
2. Can we also install Windows to an ISO file (MSDNAA), or it needs a disc?
3. I've heard that VMware is extended by the boot time of the Macbooks. Is that true?
4. VMware need much power? Is it much on the CPU? Do I need a lot of electricity or the battery life goes down much?

I am only two weeks of my book, so I can not currently use the trial version. I hope you can help me.

[napoleon]

I recommend Parallels 6, Parallels definitely has a better performance (benchmarks: native 2500pkt parallels. 2430pkt both XP 32-bit (or were even identical, parallels can boot from the boot camp partition, I think fusion will also)). Sorry, you realize (in my 3GB RAM + SL), that runs as a VM in the background. However, I have also made full power on the VM. Fusion I once tested, but somehow there was not quite so confident, I would have let's see why. I personally VMWare Fusion for three reasons pleasant than Parallels Desktop, at least on the Mac.

1. Royalty-terrorism.
2. Start-daemons and services.
3. "Feeling".

I had Parallels ordered the Apple Store. I thought nothing here, one can safely download the English version? You can - but do not activate when you have already registered a different language version. I was able to exchange four messages with the Parallels support, and send scans back and forth until the English version of "switch" was. Only after this experience I've dug through the forums and got mad at the world. Parallels is become so deeply established in the system is so restrictive that the freedom given by VM actually bought for me a massive shock. The license allowed for upgrades number of times out of it.

[Justvicks]

Parallels started on my system, different services, which should indeed do something useful, but the boot process, especially with SSD ultra low hesitated and also like in normal operation. The log was then filled with WARNING that can not just close to a proper programming. This is relatively unimportant, if it does then. But that even the relocation to sleep my MacBook lasted forever, because some give in a Parallels Service did not want to (although not even ran Parallels) does not have to be genuine. The stack with Windows programs in the Dock, I'm never getting rid of, and after each removal and in the options of Parallels it was back after a reboot since. VMWare is 100% Cocoa and focused on OS X, all from the operator ago. No comic animation effects, if you want to start a VM go down / and the menus are where they should be, the settings properly and OSX-like. It seems to me just solid and better integrated. This contrasts with the installed by Karl better performance, particularly during 3D situations, the Parallels. And with Linux you get out and 3D support, at least with Ubuntu and derivatives like Mint. This is not in VMWare. On the other hand, I was under the Parallels XP VM Dungeon Keeper 2 is not running to clean, while VMWare was no problem with. Sure, an old game but I want to be in a VM actually run Crysis or 3DMark? Then, rather, if at all, very old games that do not need much space? Just try both out. I for one was very happy over VMWare Crossgrade from Parallels.

[Michael25]

Parallels is a little deeper into the system (2 daemon, 1 + Service). However, I've never had problems (but use only P6, P5, only the test version was used otherwise). I could not even bought my P5 license after 3 days of upgrade because P6 came out (as I had with the support without any problems, e-mail account with out license back P6). That was the crossgrade thing. They advertise better performance compared to P6, although Fusion 3.1 is approximately equivalent to P5, if you look at the performance under Windows. As for the 4GB RAM: I would take at P6, SL + Windows 7 no 4GB Ram, there should already be there at least 6GB. For me with 3 GB makes on the basis of less Windows XP. XP can handle 1GB relatively well. Win 7 will definitely not. So I would also recommend you both to test. VirtualBox but I would not touch them. As it has real problems with, if you want to have Boot Camp on a separate partition (which is also fully recommend, P6 full has native SATA support and it shows, also brings in merger benefits, because you're not a disk image more have). Also, it always boot natively ... owbohl, there was not any problem relating to Windows 7 at hardware profiles?

[Warner]

Since I had again an issue. You see it so as to make sense to keep your Windows derivative accessible on a separate partition Boot Camp? And not like as beautiful as VMware. Vmdk files etc.? Then I would namely an extra iSCSI Lun folders and there create a Windows Boot Camp partition and install Windows. Is that with Parallels and the deep intervention in the system so terrible? What about this point in VMware? Thus, a virtualization software must be pretty good fit.

[Adler]

Since I had again an issue. You see it so as to make sense to keep your Windows derivative accessible on a separate partition Boot Camp? And not like as beautiful as VMware. Vmdk files etc.?

The advantage to the partition, is that you can natively boot windows. So you install Boot Camp and you have to win if you need full power, the ability for Windows to boot. If you can do without it, you can also can create disk images. Whether the nerve interference with are terrible is in large part a matter of taste. I know of two win-developers who are totally happy with Parallels and have no problem with, although they are actually working very close to the Windows system and accordingly would be ideal to get excited about intrusive software. I'm maybe a little something peculiar. Self-experimentation makes you smart.

[Vitus]

Boot Camp allows a "native" booting the operating system. So even with the right hardware drivers, it runs in a VM containing virtualized, where appropriate, with performance or compatibility problems. Funnily enough, Doom3 runs in the VM at me faster than natively in the OS X version. Virtualization seems to work quite well. Boot Camp's course runs much, much better. But I can still switch between ned on OSX. The question is dependent also why / which OSX-party software you want to run. I need the XP VM, primarily for the backup software from Nokia. Since I need so, I've installed a relatively old games. This ranges from VMWare thick and has the advantages mentioned above for me. In addition, I drive Mint and OpenSolaris, which comes with VMWare here more comfortable than with Parallels, ergo ... Who will mainly Windows, and it can run games mainly, will be decided differently.

[Shanbaag]

VMware Fusion is a naturalization software developed by VMware, Inc. for Macintosh computers with Intel. Fusion can run on Intel-based Macs and Windows x86 applications, Linux, NetWare and Solaris, and simultaneously run Mac OS as the primary system that stores the other guest operating systems. Fusion was the first virtualization system for computers based on Intel processors hit the market. Fusion utilizes Intel Vanderpool technology found in the online processors Intel Core. One of the conveniences that is unlike Parallel Fusion is support for x64 (64-bit processors) and support for SMP latter was supported from the early beta versions. The following are the System requirements :

• Intel Macs (running 64-bit compatible processor is needed with EM64T )
• 512MB of RAM (1 GB or more recommended)
• 275MB free disk space to install VMware Fusion
• 1GB free space on your hard disk for the installation of each virtual machine (10 GB or more recommended)
• Mac OS X version 10.4.9 or later

In computing, virtualization refers to the generalization of the wherewithal of a computer, called a hypervisor or VMM (Virtual Machine Monitor) that generates an abstraction layer between the hardware of the physical machine (host) and the operating system virtual machine ( virtual machine, guest), being a means to construct a virtual version of a device or resource such as a server, a storage device, network or even an operating system, which divides the resource into one or more execution environments.

[Aienstaien]

Virtualization is responsible for creating an external interface that hides an underlying implementation by combining resources at different physical locations, or by simplifying the control system. An advanced development of new platforms and virtualization technologies have led to renewed attention to this important concept. Similar to the use of terms such as "abstraction" and "object oriented", virtualization is used in many different contexts. This concept is really interesting and has been pending for many years, it seems you are finally finding their way to productive and professional development. The virtual machine in general is a complete operating system that runs as if it is installed on a hardware platform independent. Typically many virtual machines are simulated on a central computer. For the operating system "guest" work, the simulation must be large enough (always depending on the type of virtualization). "Address Space Virtualization." The virtual machine simulates multiple instances of most (but not all) of the underlying hardware environment, particularly address spaces. Such an environment supports resource sharing and hosting processes, but does not allow separate instances of operating systems "guest." Although not seen as within the category of virtual machine, this was an important historical approach, and used in systems such as CTSS, the experimental IBM M44/44X, and could be mentioned that in systems such as OS/VS1, OS/VS2 and MVS.