> I've heard anecdotal evidence that VMWare Fusion is better, > but I've only used the Linux version.
As a heavy user of both products under Mac OS X on an eight-core Mac Pro, I find VMWare to be far more robust and feature rich than Parallels. Regardless, only Parallels supports 3D OpenGL acceleration (Windows only). Accordingly, I use Parallels on the desktop (only) and VMWare everywhere else. Cheers, Warren > -----Original Message----- > From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:ccp...@jiscmail.ac.uk] On Behalf Of > Harry Powell > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 10:08 AM > To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Mac pro > > Hi > > I use Parallels on my Mac at home for both Windows XP and Ubuntu - it > works fine for me when running the more number-crunching parts of CCP4 > - haven't really looked at graphics programs like Coot & MG. > > At work I'm running VMWare (Workstation 6.0.0) on a Linux box for > Vista, and that, too, is fine. > > If anyone from Redmond is reading this, both my Windows licenses are > legit. > > On 6 Jan 2009, at 17:55, Nathaniel Echols wrote: > > > There are also options for virtualization of Windoze and Linux via > > the software Parallels although I have yet to test this out. > > > > Parallels is okay; I only use it for testing GUI code on Linux. It > > doesn't support multiple processors, which probably isn't necessary > > for most people. The graphics support was somewhat flaky in the > > past, but it now emulates 3D acceleration well enough to run Coot or > > PyMOL. I've heard anecdotal evidence that VMWare Fusion is better, > > but I've only used the Linux version. > > > > Unrelated advice: try iWork before spending a massive amount of > > money on MS Office. It's only about $40-$50 with the academic > > discount, and much less bloated. It'll still read and export Office > > documents, although I don't know how robust this is. > > > > -Nat > > Harry > -- > Dr Harry Powell, MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, MRC Centre, > Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QH > > >
