Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, David, Thresher
Thresher wrote:Parallels is NOT faster than Boot Camp. Parallels is a virtualized environment. While it's very good, it's still not running natively.
BootCamp runs Windows natively. There is no emulation.
SNM wrote:Thresher wrote:Parallels is NOT faster than Boot Camp. Parallels is a virtualized environment. While it's very good, it's still not running natively.
BootCamp runs Windows natively. There is no emulation.
Ummm. My understanding is that in virtualization it does run natively; it's just that the OS doesn't get the precedence level that it normally does. The whole point of hardware virtualization is that it doesn't require emulation.
Usacomp2k3 wrote:Does it work on the Boot Camp partition? OSX wireless support is notoriously bad.
derFunkenstein wrote:Usacomp2k3, your link is to another thread with the same problem from the same person who posted this thread in the first place. So far, it's two links for the same person's problem. The other people in that thread got it to work.
I wrote:The other people in that thread got it to work.
riviera74 wrote:I have a better question: if one needs to install XP or Vista (64-bit) on a Mac (eg a Mac Pro, iMac, MacBook Pro), is Boot Camp necessarily better than Parallels or VMware Fusion? Are there different optimal answers for XP vs Vista?
golfmore wrote:I've read that Boot Camp actually outperforms Para. The only other issue is that Boot Camp is already there (On the Lepard disk.) Anyone have any thoughts on this? I really don't want Win on this machine, but it looks like it will have to be there. Thanks for any insights.
Usacomp2k3 wrote:OSX wireless support is notoriously bad.
leor wrote:I say why not have the best of all worlds? Install boot camp, then grab parallels or vmware fusion so you can run your boot camp partition in OSX, and reboot over into the pure windows environment whenever you feel like gaming or something.