Apple's Windows site mentions Parallels Desktop instead of Boot Camp

I have found problems with Parallels especially with printing. Parallels also has NO support. I wrote to them 4 different times regarding my problems... NO response. I have decided to use Bootcamp instead, at least Apple was support. Parallels is also slow & causes problems when switching back & forth to OSX. Bob Derr

About the virus, they do run under wine but not very well. You have to keep opening them and tell them where to go:

http://os.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/01/25/1430222&from=rss

-tj

Anyone notice that the newest Mac "touche" ad sports the message "Purchase of Windows OS and Paralles software required" ??

Dude, on the bottom of the page it says:

"*Purchase of Windows and Parallels software required."

To SubGenius:

Apple likes to keep pricing simple. They will have 10.5 "Leopard" and 10.5 "Leopard" Server. If they have a virtualization software it will be included for free (if they deem it will create more switchers, id est, more revenue for Apple or they will sell it as a separate program.

Apple has stated that it will include BootCamp with Leopard as part of the OS.
I also believe Leopard will also ship with a demo version of Apple's Virualization software(just like they include a demo of iWork).

You can use BootCamp for free or pay $99 for virtualization.
Many businesses and users who need virtualization will gladly pay up.
I wouldn't be suprised If they had 2 versions of Leopard:
Leopard: $129
Leopard+Virtualization: $199

Personally I feel there is a problem with Boot Camp on the part of Apple.

I Believe, when Apple noticed someone had cobbled together a hacked bootloader and won that $13,000 or whatever it was, they was forced into unveiling their (simple) dual booting solution simply for more control over their firmware and the programs quality.

However this in itself provides the potential problem of the average Windows user being confused by the new Mac interface, and eventually booting in Windows more than the Mac OS simply because its more familiar.

To the average user, the Parallels solution (though more complicated) provides much better interaction with the Mac OS, makes it much easier to flick back and forth, and retains the Mac OS as the PRIMARY OS as opposed to the alternate OS. It’s just a much better tool to 'wean' PC uses off of Windows and onto the Mac OS.

I've been using Parallels since Friday and I have to say that, for the vast majority of people, its the way to go (even with the 50 bucks extra expense).

With the now-common caveats (no heavy lifting with 3D), I can say 10.5 with Parallels or similar functionality would be a dynamite combination. The only issue I have had is with audio CDs not playing properly. Parallels is aware of the issue and say a fix is on the way and, given how far they have progressed in the past several months, I don't doubt it.

I've got Ubuntu Linux, Windows XP, and of course OS X running at speeds which certainly look and feel native even if benchmarks probably show they are not quite.

For anyone who ever suffered through Virtual PC, it is truly a revelation.

Given their huge lead, I think Apple would be wise to buy Parallels and integrate it into 10.5 both as a component to the set up procedure (Would you like to install any additional operating systems at this time?), and as 'add later' option.

Of course, as someone else mentioned, virtualization or native booting would be the best of both worlds, and I think there is a reasonable chance of that happening.

Isn't it obvious? Apple doesn't charge anything for Bootcamp. They do charge for memory.

how about a solution called "OS XP" or "WIN X"
that is both OS X and... windows xp. that way, it's best of both