[durbrow]

Rob: Thanks for the article. Which app would you use if you are forced by your employer to run IE 6? And do you recommend XP Pro over XP Home for speed or some other reason? Thanks again.

[griffman]

Well, if the employer is paying the bill, I'd probably choose Fusion as I think it's the best all-around solution at present. If I was paying the bill, though, VirtualBox should run IE6 just fine (though my testing was with IE7). As for XP Pro vs Vista, yes, it's mainly a speed thing -- I think Vista has a nicer feature set, but you have to disable a lot of the eye candy to make it run well in the VM apps. Add in the effort to disable the despised "UAC" that otherwise pops up every five seconds, and it just seems XP Pro is a better VM solution...Windows 7 may change this, of course, if current reports (much faster than Vista) are to be believed.

-rob.

[richcon]

durbrow said:

Which app would you use if you are forced by your employer to run IE 6?

I run IE6 inside Virtualbox, which I use for testing web sites. It works great. (IE7 works too.)

Also, it's possible to run IE6 under Darwine (no Windows necessary), though it involves running X Windows and probably can't handle many ActiveX controls. If you're brave, check out: http://www.kronenberg.org/darwine/ for Darwine, http://www.kronenberg.org/ies4osx/ for the IE installer.

[damoncampagna]

macwilf:

You can run indeed AutoCAD on VMWare Fusion:
http://blogs.vmware....on-the-mac.html

Personally, I feel that even though Parallels has a slight edge in gaming (for now), their tech support (and customer service) is terrible at best. After pulling my hair out dealing with them, I switched to Fusion. I want to invest my time and money in a company that's going to be around for a while and I don't have much confidence in Parallels in the long haul.

[griffman]

Saying which has the edge in gaming is tough -- Parallels supports OpenGL, but there aren't a lot of OpenGL-only games on Windows. Fusion has a better implementation of the DirectX 9.0c standards, as seen in the brief test video I uploaded, and it ran some games that Parallels failed to run.

I'd give the edge to Fusion, but if you have a certain game you absolutely must be able to play, it's probably best to download both and test it out to see which does the better job.

-rob.

[macwilf]

You can also run IE6 on the Mac without Windows installed at all, thus saving a few. I use CrossOver from Codeweaver for that. I was lucky enough to get a free version when they had a campaign recently but otherwise it costs $39.95 and it works as advertised. But there is a limited range of programmas it supports, so if you need something else than IE6, you may rather choose one of the others.

[macwilf]

Thanks a lot for that! Thought no one had noticed my little question:)

Then one can install Windows in BootCamp and Fusion will discover it on that partition I have understood. Thus, one will have the best ofg all worlds:)

[jgvp]

I happen to have both programs. You're correct that Fusion does not run OpenGL ( Medal of Honor,) while Parallels does, though they failed to provide the usual menus in order to permit you to exit from the MOH program. You have to go to the exit from Parallels process.
I have to comment on the support I received from Parallels, which really was exemplary since they persevered with me whereas Fusion would just quit on me. The problem with Fusion is they go the additional revenue route when it comes down to support, which, had I known that before I bought, I would never have opted for Fusion in the first place.

[Spoffo]

I didn't see any reference to my kind of scenario, which I suspect is not unusual: I'm a Mac loyalist (and not a gamer.) I have no need or desire to run standard productivity or graphics apps under Windows. However, I have a number of hardware devices - - e.g. GPS databases, programmable A/V remote control - - which require use of a Windows app and USB. In a situation like this, the difference between Parallels and Fusion is overwhelming.
On my MacBook Pro with XP Pro, Parallels performance with these devices was very spotty. It absolutely refused to recognize one Garmin GPS, and its performance with the programmable remote and a USB card-writer was slow and prone to frequent freezes. With Fusion, all these USB devices work perfectly. For anybody with this kind of USB connectivity need, there's no comparison.

[durbrow]

Ubuntu people: I have had good luck running the alpha 2 version of Ubuntu 9.1 (Jaunty Jacaloupe) in Virtual Box 2.1. My question: Has anyone tried running Ubuntu in 64bit mode in VirtualBox 2.1???? Is it even worth it?

[applefan1996]

Hey all! I'm new here so forgive me if this problem's addressed. I tried Ubuntu with VirtualBox and installed the guest add-ons and etc. The graphics don't really surprise me, especially the part where I can't enjoy the cool graphics. Any ideas?

[griffman]

Do you mean Compiz Fusion? I don't believe the graphics effects work on any of the virtual machine apps -- I know they don't work on Fusion (no OpenGL acceleration) or Parallels (not sure if OpenGL acceleration extends to Linux OSes as well; posts on their forums suggest that it doesn't), and I haven't had a chance to try yet with VirtualBox 3.1.

-rob.

[applefan1996]

That was exactly what I meant. Sad that I can't use those effects thanks for the reply though!

[durbrow]

griffman: When you used Ubuntu under VirtualBox, did you get a full screen? In my setup, I got a post-card size Ubuntu desktop was unable to make it bigger. Does anyone have any idea if VirtualBox constrains the size of OS desktop/apps?