HolidayBuyer's Guide

Mac Applications forum

General discussion

Honest to god... never have I known such a bad software.

by Me, Myself and You / March 20, 2008 9:38 AM PDT

If this gets long, I apologise.

If there are any loyal parallel users out there I apologise, but my experience with the parallel desktop software has been such a dire one that I just have to get it out somehow.

Ok so it first started off about two months ago. I got a version of parallels, I think it was prior to the new version 3.0 release. before I could even begin judging it, the machine was kernel panicked by it. I thought 'screw that' and deleted the software and instead got the vmware fusion which i've been very impressed with. Now, earlier today I had a little urge to try out parallels again. I'm fanatic about virtual machines, and I run everything from Mac System 6 up to 9, Windows 3.1 to XP, and nearly every OS in between. I just thought I'd give parallel another chance and add it to my arsenal of emulators. So I did. I went to their site and downloaded the trial for version 3.0, the new version.

Well. What an adventure. After hours of trying to get it installed and troubleshooting, I finally got it. First of all I tried installing Windows ME, and after several attempts that failed. So I thought, ok, I'll try Windows XP. Windows XP managed to install actually, and appeared to be quite fast. Good, I thought, and quitted out and tried to install Windows 2000. That wouldn't work either, the setup process just froze before halfway. Kinda disappointed, I went back to the XP installation, which, on my bootcamp side and in vmware, works flawlessly. But oh no, in parallels explorer crashed on me countless times and it would often hang before completing an operation. The app sucks up memory like you wouldn't believe and the only advantage is that coherence is somewhat more polished than vmware's unity, and it's a little faster (the virtual machine) than vmware. But everything else, stability being the main factor, seems non existant.

I was so disappointed with the software that I wrote a very harshly worded complaint directly to parallels basically stating that the price they charge -and the fact that they even charge anything for such a POS- was outrageous and that I had nothing but trouble with their software. Needless to say there were some phrases used which I probably shouldn't mention here...

So has anyone else had parallel problems? I have read bad things about it all over the internet. it's just a joke, I actually laugh when I think of how much it fails.

That is all...

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Honest to god... never have I known such a bad software.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Honest to god... never have I known such a bad software.
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
I'm sure there's a lot of apps worse than Parallels
by tleMega / March 20, 2008 11:15 AM PDT

Some of them will be mine ;-). I finished installing my Xcode Tools today via my Leopard Upgrade disc (which only took a few minutes actually) and I plan to start writing apps if I can figure out what everything in the package is. What an adventure that is going to be.

If Parallels is really such a piece of junk, then I wouldn't bother trying to work with it. So by the sound of it, you've tried two versions of Parallels and both crash OS X and fail miserably. Two strikes against them; now you can wait for version 4.0 and see if it works better, if it manages to work at all! Reminds me of my internet connection... You know, I got my new modem last week, and I set it up perfectly. My connection was actually working at its full capacity for the first time in a long time... Then, Monday came, the day my ISP was going to double my connection speed. Now, I have dial-up speed and the modem hasn't be getting a full connection, but it is still getting one. I called tech support and they ran some tests and we seem to be working it out, but so far, it's not working. But, we did clarify that the problem has something to do with the DSL line and connections, not my networking hardware or computers. Ironically, when I had to reconnect my modem, I ended up having to plug it into my iMac, which is never used on the internet, and it now has to suffer from the slow speeds. Still, I have to keep this setup until the technicians find and fix the problem. Not fun at all. If only they would install some fiber optic cables in my area. That would take care of everything... Sad

iTunes could use some reworking too, at least, for the iPod Touch. On Monday (I guess it should be called "Trouble Day"), the cover flow feature on the Touch started assigning the wrong pictures to the wrong songs. Syncing it to my Mac had no effect and I was forced to restore it yesterday. Little did I know, the restore process had deleted that January Upgrade pack I downloaded after MacWorld. When I figured out where to look for the file, I found that the backups that iTunes makes for the Touch had not backed up the apps, and they were not on my Time Machine drive either. But, I'm lucky; Apple had not replaced my MBP until after I had downloaded this upgrade, and I found the files for them on my other hard drive, which I have neglected to clean since I purchased my newer disk. Anyway, iTunes should know when the iPod is supposed to have the pack installed or not, by using serial numbers, but it does not, instead relying on the account that paid for it. At least, that's what I saw somewhere.

You know, I don't use Windows on my Mac since it's a notebook with limited space, and I have other PCs to use, but that doesn't mean these emulators shouldn't be available. I think they're better for desktops, like the Mini, so that's what they should be aimed at, yet from your tale, this particular VM does not function correctly at all. It's not going to last long if this happens frequently to other users.


Collapse -
Parallels Problems
by mrmacfixit Forum moderator / March 20, 2008 11:01 PM PDT

I've done 4 installs of // and XP and have to say that I have not seen the problems you mentioned.

Just out of curiosity, what are you using to run System 6 to 9?


Collapse -
Sheepshaver and Mini vMac
by Me, Myself and You / March 20, 2008 11:56 PM PDT
In reply to: Parallels Problems

mini vMac emulates a Mac Plus, so you can run System 1 up to and including 7.5.3 in it. The screen, as on a real plus, is postage stamp sized and in monochrome, and if you put the emulator to native Plus speed, it's crazy slow.

For the upper versions of classic I use Sheepshaver, which emulates a 100MHz PowerMac. It's great fun emulating old systems and on a computer like the Mac Mini it's perfect for the job.

Collapse -
(NT) I'll take a look at those. Thanks
by mrmacfixit Forum moderator / March 21, 2008 1:36 AM PDT
Collapse -
I think it's amazing
by tleMega / March 21, 2008 3:29 AM PDT

that many Mac users still use what would now be considered old, outdated, and maybe retro operating systems on their Macs. Some refuse to switch to using newer Intel Macs because they long for Classic support and whatnot. I tried Classic on my G4 before I upgraded it to Leopard, and I didn't get much out of it. But that's me, and I'm not as dependent on older applications.

I don't think you can say the same for other systems. Supposing you happen to be running System 1, that could imply that there are others doing the same. That's the original version of Mac OS, from 1984, and I doubt that more people could be using the original version of Windows in comparison. Mac users cling to their machines longer because they can handle many of Apple's updates and because they just last a long time. It's no wonder Apple has developed such a loyal fan base :D.


Collapse -
Not necessarily.
by Me, Myself and You / March 21, 2008 8:16 AM PDT
In reply to: I think it's amazing

I run Windows 3.1 and DOSBox (I'd use real DOS but DB is easier) and Windows 3.1. I can't find any decent torrents of Windows 1.x and 2.x nor can I find on ebay or whatever. Windows 3.1 is about as low as I'd go and so is Mac System 6 and 7. They aren't much use, it's just entirely for nostalgia. I even have a GUI gallery on the web, needing updated in fact.

Collapse -
What I meant was
by tleMega / March 21, 2008 9:15 AM PDT
In reply to: Not necessarily.

some people sill rely on Classic, OS 8, OS 9, etc. I see some people blogging about how they prefer using their PowerPC Macs to boot up into previous operating systems (or maybe just OS 9) for actual work, not just for the fun of it. I'm not saying some people don't use older versions of Windows, as I've seen some people who actively use Windows 2000 to this day. I mean that some people really need OS 9 and Classic support. I can't exactly recall the name of it, nor all the details, but there was an old website creator app or something like it for OS 9, that doesn't run on OS X. Some people do use it through Classic or OS 9 daily... My point is that it is possible that there are more people using older applications like that on older Mac systems compared to the Windows side. Of course there may be some people who actually require older versions of Windows. I may be wrong, but that's what I heard. Grin

For the record, OS 9 can be useful, especially when you have to upgrade some firmware if you're attempting to install a new G4 CPU in a Power Mac.


Collapse -
And now we bid a fond farewell to tales of Pirates and such
by mrmacfixit Forum moderator / March 21, 2008 11:07 AM PDT
In reply to: Not necessarily.

Locking this thread.


Collapse -
Just sharing.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / March 20, 2008 11:54 PM PDT

I wonder about those Windows CDs. My friend who does that says what you use matters. For XP you want the bona fide XP SP2 CD (nothing less!) and no OEM or copies (but make a copy of course for backup). For Windows 2000 the bona fide 2000 SP1 but he likes the slipstreamed SP4 CD to save him time. The older versions of Windows are best avoided at all costs since the pain and loss of cognitive skills plus that sucking sounds that you hear as you try it must be avoided.

Popular Forums
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Cameras that make great holiday gifts

Let them start the new year with a step up in photo and video quality from a phone.