The main reason for Fusion, is were heavy into Vmware at work. Parallels is the easiest to install and set up, and is pretty fool proof. This is especially true if the previously-installed hypervisor was VMware. I have also used Suns Virtualbox, and its free - actually Ive never had any issues with it either. The newly-installed system will not be as stable as it would have been installed on a clean Mac. Things can and sometimes will go wrong, and you are down on your knees begging for trouble if you install one, "uninstall" it, and then install another on the same system. Please make and test a full backup of your system before installing any of these, and format down to bare metal before switching from one to another (hence the backup). WARNING WARNING WARNING! Danger, Will Robinson extreme danger! (Of course, if you can get everything you need from Docker, you don't need any of these VM packages). Smooth, easy to configure, stable it even lets you run a virtual system like Docker properly in a VM (by supporting CPU virtualisation instructions). VMware is what you want to run those "alternative" Linuxes, or any Linux, really. It's easy to run into corner cases with Linux, though, especially if you're not using a Debian- or Red Hat-based distro. Parallels is, hands down, the easiest/fastest/best (pick any four) way to run Windows on a Mac. Avoid if you value your time above ~$0.30/hour you'll save money-for-time this year. I didn't find Slackware performance acceptable even on a then-new-and-shiny MBP with maxed-spec RAM and CPU speed. I've used all three in (recent) versions past, and Fusion up until about six months ago.Īs others have noted, VirtualBox is glacially slow.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |