If you've been looking to snag Parallels Desktop version 3.0, but don't want to pay the $79.99 associated with Parallels then a summer MacHeist bundle is just the thing. MacHeist is currently offering Parallels Desktop + Mac Pilot for only $49 (US).

Returning MacHeist customers receive a $10 discount, making the bundle only $39. That's a steal! In addition, the first 1000 customers to purchase the bundle will recieve a free "mystery application" (one that's an Apple award winner) which will be detailed on Friday.

Update: The rumor on the street is hinting at the "mystery application" to be either Coda or Lineform.

In October, when Apple introduced a change in policy allowing Leopard Server to run in a virtual environment on Apple hardware, Mac IT geeks everywhere looked forward to the day that they could run Windows Server, Linux and OS X Server all off their pretty Xserves. That day is today, because Parallels Server for Mac is now out of beta!

According to Parallels, this is the "...first server virtualization software to run on Intel-based Xserves...and to power VMs running on the Mac OS X platform." Similar the the Parallels Desktop product, Parallels Server lets you run virtual instances of different operating systems on top of OS X Leopard Server, including Leopard Server. The next beta of VMWare's Fusion, which like Parallels Desktop is a consumer product, will support Leopard virtualization as well, but Parallels Server is a little different and aimed at a different market.

The difference is that the hypervisor used in Parallels Server is hardware optimized and takes advantage of Intel's VT-x acceleration (which new XServe and Mac Pros have) to provide a more robust experience with better allocation of resources and memory. This makes the experience much more akin to running a completely separate machine, as opposed to running one OS on top of another.

Yesterday, we reported on Media Temple's new (xv) project, which is the first official service that will be run on Xserves running Parallels Server for Mac. The (xv) will be running multiple VMs of Leopard Server, but Parallels Server can also support Linux (Debian, SUSE, Red Hat and Ubuntu), Windows (Server 2008, Vista, XP and Server 2003 and Windows 2000) and FreeBSD 6 and 7 as guest OSes. So if you run your website off of CentOS (which is based off of Red Hat Enterprise) but your company network runs off of Leopard Server, you can do both off of one Xserve.

Make no mistake, this is an enterprise product, and as such, it is pricey. Parallels Server for Mac is $1248.75 for the software and one-year of support and maintenance and that's before you add in the cost of any software licenses you might need, but that's still a lot less expensive than another Xserve.

For enterprise users who are interested in virtualization, definitely check out the free trial.

Thanks Russ!

The latest build of Parallels (version 5608) adds some new tools for Linux users. Some of the additions to Parallels Desktop 5608 includes: support for the latest Linux distros, and support for 3D graphics in Windows (running under 10.5.3).

If you are running version 3 of Parallels Desktop, then you are eligible to upgrade for free to Desktop 5608. Just click "Check for Updates" in the Help menu of Parallels.

[via MacNN]

We first noted the open-source virtualization application VirtualBox way back in 2007, and since then this open-source competitor to VMware Fusion and Parallels has come a long way. Most importantly, perhaps, the project was acquired by Sun Microsystems and has now become Sun xVM VirtualBox with a great deal more support.

The application is free for personal use and is available for a wide variety of x86 platforms including OS X on Intel Macs. The feature set is extensive and includes a lot of the features of its commercial counterparts. That said, it lacks many of the niceties of those programs, including any kind of 3D graphics support. Nonetheless, it's hard to argue with free and is probably worth checking out if your virtualized Windows requirements are modest.

Sun xVM VirtualBox is a free download from Sun.

Thanks, Dean!

Parallels, Inc. yesterday released a new version of its flagship virtualization app Parallels Desktop (3.0.5600), which includes support for Windows Vista SP1 and Windows XP SP3. It also fixes some kernel panic issues, unusually high CPU usage, and provides improvements to Shared Folders.

Parallels allows Macs with Intel processors to run Windows apps alongside Mac apps. You can follow our past coverage of Parallels here.

The update is free for existing Parallels 3 users, and is available as a 88 MB DMG package.

[via MacUpdate]

Must be software bundle season -- on the heels of the MacHeist bundle last week, the MacUpdate Parallels bundle is now on sale. MU is featuring the usual unlock scheme, whereby the top-line apps remain off the table until the requisite number of bundles have been sold.

For this bundle, as you might have sussed out from the name, MU is headlining Parallels as the final unlockable app; other apps include Hazel, Art Text, Leap, Typinator, DVD Remaster Pro, and (still to be unlocked) Sound Studio and BannerZest. $64.99 for the lot of them (assuming the unlock thresholds are reached), less than the retail cost of Parallels alone -- not bad.

As the value of a bundle decreases proportionally with the number of applications you already own, you might consider a bundle gift for the switcher in your life. Especially with Parallels in the mix, a new Mac user coming from Windows-land would probably be thrilled to get a whole pile of goodies.

A heads-up for readers -- while MU has an affiliate-link program in place, please don't use our comments for linkfarming. Comments with affiliate links will be deleted.

What madness is this, a post about installing Windows? Well, actually, the folks over at VMware's Team Fusion link to this handy Lifehacker guide to trimming down Windows XP to the bare essentials. Obviously this is of interest to anybody running Windows on a Mac, particularly on a portable with limited hard drive space. So if you should find yourself needing to tread on the dark side (whether in Boot Camp, Parallels or Fusion), it's worth a look. Besides, as I always say, the less Windows the better. It's just a shame you have to build it yourself on a machine running Windows with the Windows utility nLite and can't simply download a pre-built virtual machine.

Despite the publicity around Parallels' flagship Mac product, Parallels Desktop (which we've contributed to in some small part), there are some other interesting tools in the stable of Parallels' parent company, SWsoft -- which is now being rebranded as Parallels, Inc. just to keep us on our toes. One of those products is Parallels Virtuozzo Containers (PVC), which launches version 4.0 today in a webcast event at 11 am (Eastern). While PVC is not a Mac-compatible server (yet), the technology choices Parallels made in developing it may illuminate some future paths for the yet-unreleased Parallels Server product for Mac OS X.

Virtualization products like Parallels Desktop, VMware Fusion, and Microsoft's Virtual Server work via a hypervisor model, virtualizing the hardware platform so that each virtual machine runs in its own full-OS environment. This approach does a great job of insulating the VMs from the underlying physical hardware and provides for OS and build diversity (Windows, Linux and eventually Mac OS X Server running on the same virtualization platform) but it has some drawbacks: each virtual machine consumes a full helping of RAM, disk space and CPU resources while running, as though it was a physical machine. VMware in particular is respected for its expertise in optimizing these resource demands with its ESX enterprise-level server products, but the baseline requirements for system resources can't be fully alleviated.

PVC does OS virtualization, which tackles the problem of resource allocation for virtual machines in a different way. Virtuozzo VMs, or "containers," are created as overlays on the base OS that runs on the physical server, like a piece of transparent acetate over an animation backdrop. All the basic OS processes, files and libraries are present in the base server OS instance, and the container holds the differential changes that allow the VMs their individual characteristics and configurations. While you sacrifice one big feature of hypervisor systems, the ability to diversify OSes -- since the base OS is fixed as either Windows or Linux, all the containers have to be built on top of that OS -- what you gain is substantial, as each additional running VM takes only a small chunk of RAM and a comparatively tiny swath of hard drive space to work in. Virtuozzo servers can handle high VM loading on relatively modest hardware without taking major performance hits, which is a big plus if your server budget is constrained.

In the OS X virtualization session at Macworld Expo, the Parallels folks suggested that we may see both hypervisor and OS virtualization approaches integrated in the Parallels Server product, as the engineering teams from PVC and Server have the opportunity to put their heads together. Parallels has also said that the management tools for PVC and Parallels Server will be integrated as development moves forward. Even though PVC doesn't support the Mac directly, if you're interested in virtualization you might pop into the webcast and check it out.

Although I am, and always will be, a devoted user of Apple products, the Macintosh and OSX, occasionally I find the need to do something that only the vagaries of Windows can accomplish. In the past, this required me to have a separate computer (a PC) with an install of Windows.

Fortunately, with Apple's switch to all Intel all the time, I no longer need that other Windows PC and instead can use a "virtual" Windows PC running on my Mac with the help of a software product provided by Parallels or VMware.

In the past, I was a big fan of Parallels and used it exclusively. More recently, though, I have switched to VMware Fusion for my Windows virtualization needs. Nothing against Parallels, its still a great product, but I just find VMware a bit more "Mac-like" and easier to setup and use. If you agree and use VMware Fusion as well, head on over to their website because there's an update to the software waiting there just for you.

This update is, according to the VMware site: "a maintenance release that contains fixes for a variety of issues." What might these issues be, you may wonder? Well, if you really want to know, feel free to read the release notes. Or, if you decide to just "go for it" and not read the fine print, go here and download away.

While VMware's OS X virtualization offering is described as a 'technology preview' (translation: still too buggy for beta), the team at Parallels is beta-ready with the new Parallels Server product, allowing you to virtualize OS X Server alongside your Windows, Windows Server and Linux VMs. The server version from 'Big Red' also features experimental support for Intel's VT-d directed I/O capability (present on the newest Mac Pro and XServe machines), lightweight and 'bare metal/headless' hypervisor modes, and 2-way SMP multicore in a VM (expected to support 4-way SMP in the final version).

Feel the power of this mostly operational virtualization station in our brief video demo with Parallels marketing lead Ben Rudolph (video after the jump). Pricing and availability on Parallels Server aren't announced yet but as soon as they are we'll let you know.

Update: Commenters have suggested that 'too buggy for beta' was an unfair characterization of VMware's demo, and they're probably right -- I did not mean to diminish the incredible efforts of developers at VMware, who like the Parallels crew have been working very hard on this. Also suggested was the notion that Parallels Server beta is an inferior offering and it can't install an unmodified copy of Leopard Server (as VMware's demo did -- the video linked on Regis' blog was shot by me :-). I can't vouch for the install process, but I can say that the Parallels instance of X Server worked as expected when I had hands-on time with it. Parallels is not new, corporately, to the challenge of enterprise virtualization; the Virtuozzo product line is both reliable and well-regarded, and the engineering talent behind those products is now collaborating on the Parallels Server work.

The long history of the Parallels Server release is moving ever closer to an end: SWsoft (which is changing their name to Parallels) has announced that the product has moved into beta. This thing is the holy grail for Mac server administrators, apparently-- it's supposed to not only be the first virtualization solution to run on Apple hardware, but will also allow admins to run multiple versions of Leopard on one box, and even on Windows or Linux servers. I'm pretty clueless at fine art of administering servers, but even I can see how that would have all the IT guys in a tizzy.

It's still a closed beta at this point, so you've got to sign up if you want to experience the magic for yourself. And apparently the Parallels folks work fast, so odds are we're headed for an open beta within a few weeks. Soon, Mac OS Server will be at the mercy of any IT overseers to bend and use at their will.

Like it or not, lots of us who own Intel-based Macs have to run Windows from time to time. Although Boot Camp is pretty fantastic if you need to run a processor intensive application (or you want to play games), virtualization is the more attractive solution for users who need to access productivity applications, like Microsoft Office 2007, but don't want to have to live in the Windows environment. The two big players in the virtualization field are VMWare's Fusion and Parallels' Parallels. Both applications let you install a Windows XP or Vista virtual machine on your Intel Mac without having to leave OS X, both offer a level of integration between the two operating systems and both retai for $79.99 (USD). So, which virtualization program is the fastest? Well, that's what MacTech attempted to find out in their exhaustive benchmarking trials, comparing Fusion 1.0 (build 51348), Parallels 3.0 (build 5160) and Boot Camp head-to-head-to-head in a variety of different computing tasks.

So what's the bottom line? Because of how the software if designed to integrate between the two platforms, Parallels came out ahead in many of MacTech's tests. For certain more processor heavy uses, VMWare, thanks to its ability to take advantage of both cores, came out the best. For networking performance, Boot Camp was king.

While I found the benchmarking tests very interesting - and useful - prospective buyers should be aware that in the middle of MacTech's testing procedure, all three Windows options for OS X were upgraded. With the release of Leopard, Boot Camp came out of beta and VMWare is now at version 1.1 and Parallels was updated on December 5 to build 5582. I know just from my own unscientific experience, Fusion 1.1 improved significantly in speed and overall performance from version 1.0 and while I was a big fan of Parallels under Tiger, I have "switched" to Fusion for Leopard.

Trial-versions are available for both programs. Remember that in order to use Windows XP or Vista, you need a valid user license.

Thanks, Rich.

The release build of Parallels Desktop 3 still isn't quite Leopard-happy, but that's not cause for abject despair: the second beta since 10.5 came out was released on Saturday, with enhanced support for Leopard, improved migration tools for Boot Camp partitions into Parallels disk images, and more.

You can download the 88 MB file of build 5570 from Parallels, but the usual warnings apply: back up your virtual machines before running with the wolves.

In our post yesterday on VMware Fusion 1.1 we mentioned that VMware had also included a beta of their new Importer application. However, after using it tonight, I thought it was worth a separate post of its own, because it makes migrating from Parallels to Fusion incredibly easy. The amazing thing is that I converted an old Parallels 2.5 WinXP VM which Parallel's 3 itself had not been able to import successfully!

Basically, when you start the Importer it gives you a window in which to drop the Parallels .pvs file (just Win2000, WinXP, Win2003 Server or Vista at this time). It asks you where you want to save the new Virtual Machine and a few minutes later, boom it starts right up in Fusion -- no muss and no fuss. For me the amazing thing was that I had previously tried to import the same image into Parallels 3 and it failed. So basically the upshot is this: if you're running Parallels, but you'd like to give Fusion a try, the barrier to entry has now dropped to next to nothing (besides the hard drive space).

I bought Parallels for my Intel Mac as soon as it was released,but given my experience with Fusion (especially with the downloadable appliances), I think VMware has a convert. I fully recommend giving it a try. The VMware Importer is a free download. It's also supplemented by the VMware convertor which will create an image of a working PC that can then be imported into Fusion as a VM.

Big-iron system admins with a Mac streak (there's more of them than you'd think) would dearly love to see a fully virtualizable version of Mac OS X Server, one that could be slotted into a VMware infrastructure on third-party hardware, and run alongside other server OSes like Windows Server, Linux and Solaris, sharing hardware resources and reducing administrative costs. Shame that it won't happen: Apple's licensing doesn't permit running 10.x Server on anything other than Apple gear. There is some change in the air, though, as a careful reading of the new license agreement for Server 10.5 reveals -- virtualization of OS X Server on OS X Server may be coming sooner rather than later.

A post on the Macenterprise mailing list and an article at TidBITS take note of this licensing change, which now would seem to explicitly permit the use of multiple instances of Mac OS X Server on a single Apple machine. With this green light, applications like the in-early-beta Parallels Server and the unannounced but surely-in-progress VMware equivalent could provide multiple instances of OS X Server along with Linux or Windows VMs, all on the same box. Depending on how your network services are set up, this could be a big help in selling X Server into your organization.

We'll keep an eye on both Parallels and VMware for future announcements in server virtualization. Exciting times!

via Adam Engst/twitter. Thanks to everyone else who sent this in.