MacDirectory Magazine

COMPARA TIVE REVIEW VMWARE FUSION VS. PARALLELS DESKTOP WORDS BY TREY YANCY Whether you are switching from Windows to the Mac or you need to run an occasional Windows program, there are a number of virtualization applications that allow you to do just that. The two main contenders are VMWare Fusion 3 and Parallels Desktop 5. When Apple made the switch to Intel, VMWare, which already provided a range of virtualization options for the PC, was the first out the gate and it held on to the lead in features and performance for most of the decade. With the unveiling of the latest version of Desktop, there was no question that VMWare had a serious fight on its hands, particularly in the area of speed. Both solutions allow you to run any version of Windows that has been released over the past 15 years, as well as any other operating system that a PC can handle, including a variety of UNIX operating systems. They are able to work with your existing OS X services, such as printing, Internet, etc., and you can use any peripheral that will run on a PC. When you install either Fusion or Desktop, you are prompted to pop in your Windows installation disk. A folder is automatically created that serves as your virtual PC hard drive. You are also able to take over any existing Windows installations, such as from Boot Camp or if you decide to switch between virtualization applications. If, for some reason, you need to run both Fusion and Desktop, they do fight over certain resources so whoever launches first wins. Also not that Microsoft is well aware of virtualization on the Mac, despite the gray areas regarding licensing, which means that running both Desktop and Fusion requires two separate licenses for Windows 7. Both Desktop and Fusion offer you the option of running Windows in full screen mode, in a floating window on the Mac desktop, or in an integrated mode, in which the Start menu and Windows applications are accessible from the dock Desktop vs. Fusion Both contenders are fully mature and do an excellent job but they do have slightly different approaches. For example, Fusion makes it easy to quickly switch between different OS installations and to save multiple states (such as a state with open business applications and another with a game in progress) and access them via a library window or menu. Desktop has a similar feature but handles things through a menu and a less elegant window. In an integrated setup, Desktop takes a slight lead. Under crystal mode (one of four modes available), Windows apps appear in a folder in the dock and the start menu is available via the right side of the Mac menu bar. In coherence mode, programs in the task bar appear as icons in the dock, as does the start menu and folder containing your Windows applications. Fusion offers a unity mode, which resembles crystal but without the start menu. Both offer full screen modes and Windows in a window. In terms of desktop integration, the nod goes to Desktop. There are other differences, as well. For example, if you have set the Windows environment to appear in a floating window and you want to move your mouse to the Mac environment, Desktop requires you to type a key combination to release and the Windows programs appear in your Mac environment right alongside the Mac applications. Say, for example, that you need to run Microsoft Project on a Mac. In the integrated mode the MS Project window appears on your Mac just like any Mac app. Launch another application, such as Safari, and its window sits on top of the Project Window just as you might expect. the cursor, whereas Fusion allows the mouse to move freely. In this respect Fusion is the clear winner. Fusion also makes it easier to select a specific virtual machine on startup. Other than integration, the two main differences are in the areas of speed and, to a lesser degree, graphics quality. After 100 MacDirectory

• Cover