Lifehacker takes on Parallels Coherence

(Michael Rose) -- That's exactly the type of answer I wanted to hear! Thanks buddy!

#8 -- Chris, the beta is FREE so you have nothing to lose by downloading and trying it out (except time). More RAM would be better but I have seen good performance on 1 GB machines.

How's the performance when running Parallels on a MacBook (2.0GHZ Core Duo w/ 1GB memory)?

I'm really itching to try this out but I want to make sure it runs smoothly on my system.

Please advise.. Thanks!

@2 sladuuch

I use it with Pro Corp with no issues, and no need to fiddle with any install discs

@sladuuch

It does. If you've got XP Corp SP1 you can slipstream SP2 into the installation disc.

"When you activate Expose, they all appear grouped together as one application (obvisouly). It would be awsome if Parallels could figure out how to make them operate independantly."

you could run topdesk through parallels, this is basically expose for windows, assign a keyboard shortcut (different from osx expose and use both :)

Be aware that the 3036 beta is buggy, especially when setting up Parallels to use a Boot Camp windows installation. The biggest problem is that switching between booting Windows with Boot Camp and booting Windows with Parallels causes Windows to say that it needs to be activated again. The reactivation comes up when ever one switches between Boot Camp and Parallels. It's a real problem. See the Parallels forum for more.

I find that placing the Windows menu bar on top and autohiding it is better than the side. (At least with Windows XP, not sure about Vista since I haven't used it). The reason is that if it's on the side or the bottom it's still visible. This was one of those stupid annoyances with WIndows I always hated. Hiding the menu bar never really hid it, there was always this stupid gray line at the edge of your screen. You also have to have at least one Window open for it to work. Another annoyance. The reason I put it on top, is because it is hidden in the shadow of the Apple menu bar. It's still visible but you really can't see it. Sort of an optical illusion. Thanks Apple!

The other thing I discovered is that you have to set the screen resolution of the Windows instance to match what you have set on your monitor. If they are different, when you go into Coherence mode the Windows GUI will distort.

When you activate Expose, they all appear grouped together as one application (obvisouly). It would be awsome if Parallels could figure out how to make them operate independantly. There is a bug with the cmd.exe that will cause the cmd window to only appear if there is another window from another application open. Check the forums. Parallels says they are aware of it.

Also, you should disable the (Windows) screen saver. If you leave it active, when it activates your whole desktop will turn black. Coherence doesn't ignore it.

There is also a problem that a lot of poeple, myself included, have with Parallels tools. Installing it with the beta can cause Windows to blue screen. But you have to have the tools installed for Coherence to work. Be sure you are using a copy of your virtual machine.

Other than that, Coherence is really slick. With Microsoft copying the OS X GUI, running Coherence with Vista might actually be even better, since the Windows apps won't look quite so out of place. Once they iron out all the bugs and add 3D graphics support, Parallels will be an even nicer addtion to the Mac universe.

Now if only it worked with XP Pro Corporate…

And yet, a lot of us still wait for VMWare. Its interface is certainly more Mac-like, it has a roster of premade virtual machines that can be trivially downloaded, and performance is significantly better.

However, Parallels has impressed me with the sheer speed to market they've achieved, and the Coherence mode is truly innovative. Competition should be good all around. Sad that Connectix...ahem, Microsoft...didn't join the party.