[Closed] Mac / Windows dual boot stuff - parallels?? talk to me

No actual experience but I've read a bit about it. You can get software that runs on the Mac OS that mimics windows, this will be slower but if you only need to use one application then it's probably a better idea. But if you set up a dual boot, it's like having two separate computers, neither should affect the other. For virus protection use AVAST. It's what I use on my Macbook too. (it's free)

I think nowadays you need to have virus protection on a mac too, I've had a couple of nasties (caught by AVAST though).

I use VM Ware Fusion with windows 7 - works well for the few bits of windows software I have to use.

Dual boot/boot camp are different to parallels.

Parallels or Virtualbox (free, and decent) are virtualised and run Windows in a virtual machine under OSX. Dual boot means your mac will boot directly into windows.

I imagine there would be little noticible difference in performance, although dual boot would be 'faster'.

Yes you will need AV software. Having said that, I don't use it in my windows VM, as I never take it online - used only for memory map.

Having an SSD makes using VMs much more tolerable as VMs will load/boot much faster than a traditional disk.

I run Parallels on my MBP. You need a Window license, but I took an old serial number of a work PC they were binning and used that to license a copy of XP in parallels.

It does slow the Mac down a bit running it, but then Windows isn't exactly light weight, so you're asking a lot of the HW. However, it runs fine and lets you do windows things on a Mac, which is fine.

same here for VMware fusion, can boot to either OS, or can run both simultaneously with windows either in a separate desktop, in a window or within the mac desktop! Mostly v stable and creates virtual folders to share info between OS. Used to mainly use it for photoshop and a stats program, but use it less and less now due to GIMP and R.
Have parallels at work and the interface is not as good

Can Dual Boot (my MBP does this if it's a heavy W7 session).

Or virtual machine - Fusion by preference (£35 IIRC, 1 month trial), or Virtual Box as above (which is free).
I use Fusion to set up a virtual m/c for testing, or when I'm simply monitoring emails, project status and so on.

Need a key and possibly an ISO image to install either, but not technically difficult..

Oh, and have used Avast! anti-virus but switched over the main W7 machine to Microsoft Security Essentials recently.

Boot camp allows booting of one OS at a time I think. I use Parallels which allows a true dual boot on virtual machine. It's worked really well for me and is seamless in operation. Can manage files using Finder and Explorer on the same directory, cut and paste between the OS's etc...

I went for Windows 7 64 bit as I prefer it, licences were available at reasonable retail prices and clean images easy to find for install. I use MSE for protection.

J

If you're only running lightweight programs occasionally, VMware Fusion is probably a better approach. It works pretty well and doesn't seem to impact performance too badly. If you're looking to run games or anything intensive, Bootcamp is probably the way to go.

VMware fusion is really straightforward, and lets you easily set up multiple virtual machines. I once used it with several different versions of Windows for testing things.

Bootcamp won't slow it down at all, though beware: getting windows 8.1 to work with it was a complete ball ache and took me the best part of a day. I don't recall why exactly, but I think it's that there's one specific version of Windows 8.1 that's supported. Compatibility can also be erratic, for instance bootcamp drivers can force windows to use the more powerful of two GPUs, vastly reducing your battery life.

Installing anything earlier on a newer MBP is (probably) impossible or at least a lot of hassle, because it seems nothing up to Windows 7 included USB3.0 drivers, and hence won't even recognise trackpads, keyboard input or anything you've plugged in once installation starts.

If you're on a hard disk, rebooting between OSes takes long enough you might as well put the kettle on. If you're on an SSD, it takes about ten seconds for either to boot.

OP your MacBook is probably a bit old/slow to try and run windows on it although it might be worth a try to save the cost of a new machine. if you are looking at iMac just a note that the new low end machine isn't so powerful, so probably best buying at least the next model up. You might also consider a Mac Book Pro (retina one has latest and best processor etc) and replace you old MacBook (which you can still probably sell on). As above if your budget can stretch get 8gm ran and 256gb SSD (easy to add cheap external storage, eg USB 1tb drive is £50) - the windows stuff consumes a lot of resources.

I use VM Ware Fusion with windows 7 - works well for the few bits of windows software I have to use.

and this

Having an SSD makes using VMs much more tolerable as VMs will load/boot much faster than a traditional disk.

+1 for parallels desktop. It can run coherence mode so windows app appear on the mac desktop. It looks seemless as if you are running windows apps but in osx. The problem Ive found a few times is the documentation is a bit limited when there are problems. There seems to be a constant stream of updates and versions which I'm not sure I buy into, every time I update something gets broken rather than fixed.

I use Fusion, as VMware give you a free licence if you're certified by them. Have used Parallels in the past, and Virtual Box (free I beleive so worth trying first) and I think being 100% honest for a simple 1 VM use case you'd struggle to notice a difference.

Get as much RAM for the iMac aftermarket (much cheaper) as you can, SSD drive is like magic pixie dust, though again for a single VM you'll live perfectly well without it - it really shines when you have multiple VMs contending for 'spindles' with each other and the guest OS.

Running XP under parallels on a 2009 2.5 gig core2duo macbook pro, with Mavericks, 4gb ram and a 256gb ssd here. Mavericks, if you don't have it, and as said above many times an ssd, will give your mac a new lease of life.

Works fine, windowed or in coherence, though I don't place too many demands on it (Excel, my turbotrainer software).

Using virtual machines doesn't affect performance significantly unless you don't have much ram.

The OS you are running inside the VM (aka the guest) won't be as fast as it would be if you were running it normally, but that's peak performance - in normal use you won't be able to tell. The physical machine (aka the host) won't be affected at all unless your guest is doing a lot of work ie you set a job running to do something.

OP your MacBook is probably a bit old/slow to try and run windows on it although it might be worth a try to save the cost of a new machine.

My 2008 MacBookPro runs Windows via Parallels fine. As much RAM as you can stuff in and an SSD and you'll be golden.

I run Win7 on Virtual Box on a linux laptop - it works fine, performance is acceptable, and it has the Suunto drivers that linux lacks. It's not the newest of laptops, at 3-4 years old with an i5, 4GB of ram and an old-style HD.

BUT: how much time do you spend using the works software? If you're going to be using it >75% of the time I wouldn't bother with virtualisation, I'd just replace your Lenovo with another Windows machine - it sounds like you just got unlucky with yours, and it'll no doubt be cheaper.

BUT: how much time do you spend using the works software? If you're going to be using it >75% of the time I wouldn't bother with virtualisation, I'd just replace your Lenovo with another Windows machine - it sounds like you just got unlucky with yours, and it'll no doubt be cheaper.

Even as a rabid Mac fan, he does have a point. I've had Lenovo's for the past 8 years for work, switched out every 3 years and they've all been flawless too.

Of course, if you just want an iMac far be it from me to stop you 😀