Aral Balkan

Comments

• Fuck, you're really digging that word, eh? ;)

  by keith peters on 2006-06-18 22:36:31

• The Mac version works like a charm as well. Briliant software! :D J

  by Jensa on 2006-06-18 22:36:33

• Hi Aral, Just a word of caution - I've been using Parallels on Windows for a couple of months and absolutely loving it, BUT .... I've learnt not to run it while I have a DVD playing on a second monitor. It tends to crash hard - locks not only the virtual machine up, but the host OS machine as well. After a reboot, I find the Parallels image is badly f@#$ed up - boot records missing and basically unrecoverable. So I've learnt to backup the various working virtual machine images on a daily basis (or more often depending on how important the data/project is). It's only happened twice in 2 months, but twice was enough. I've messed around with the various acceleration options as was hinted on the support forums, but it didn't seem to make any difference. Cheers, - Ian

  by Ian Chia on 2006-06-19 00:53:40

• I'm confused, what exactly does Parallels do? And you said you're installing it on your Windows box, so how are you able to see the suse install? Does this replace a KVM switch? Forgive me for being numb on this subject.

  by jeria on 2006-06-19 02:06:32

• LOL Keith: Are you trying to imply that I've been spending far too much time with Hoss? :) Jensa: That's part of the reason I'm trying it out. I think I might go Mac and run XP under Parallels. After all, it *almost* doesn't matter what your primary OS is at this point. Mac is the only option that gives you the ability to run all three operating systems, though, so it's looking very tempting. Ian: Thanks for the heads up -- much appreciated. I might just try it here to see if I can recreate the issue (I use a nifty little utility called UltraMon for managing multiple monitors -- maybe that will make a difference.) Jeria: Parallels lets you run other operating systems using virtual machines. So, for example, if you have a Windows box, you can create a virtual machine and install Linux on it and run that in a window just like any other application. As far as that Linux installation is concerned, it believes that it is running in its own computer, with its own display, etc. Of course, Parallels maps a lot of that (display, DVD drive, sound card, etc.) to your actual hardware using a lightweight virtualization layer.

  by aral on 2006-06-19 07:57:33

• Hi Aral, what is the difference between x86 Emulator and Virtual Machine here? Just wondering if it isn't both the same?!

  by sascha/hdrs on 2006-06-19 09:56:55

• jeria: Paralells is a virtual machine software (VM) that allow you to install virtually any OS and run it in a window (or fullscreen) on either OSX or Windows using emulation.

  by Jensa on 2006-06-19 14:24:15

• BTW - Parallels is dev. company with Russian roots :) . Previous product "twoostwo" was developed specially for OS/2 emulation. It's good replace of MS Virtual PC and WMVare WKS =)

  by Alexander on 2006-06-19 15:42:26

• I keep wondering of a virtual machine actually works in a windows environment, whats the install like, where does it get installed, etc. Do you need a partition? Time to hit google for some articles.

  by jeria on 2006-06-19 17:40:44

• Sascha, the entry on hypervisors at Wikipedia should give you all the background you need (and more!) :) To quote:

  The x86 architecture used in most PC systems is particularly hard to virtualize. Full virtualization (presenting the illusion of a complete set of standard hardware) on x86 has significant costs in hypervisor complexity and runtime performance. An alternative approach requires that the guest operating system be modified to make system calls to the hypervisor, rather than executing machine I/O instructions which are then simulated by the hypervisor. This is called paravirtualization in Xen, a "hypercall" in Parallels Workstation, and a "DIAGNOSE code" in IBM's VM. All are really the same thing, a system call to the hypervisor below. CPU vendors are adding hardware virtualization assistance to their products. Intel's codename for these extensions is Vanderpool, AMD's is Pacifica. These extensions will address the parts of x86 that are difficult or inefficient to virtualize, providing additional support to the hypervisor. This enables simpler virtualization code and a higher performance for full virtualization.

  Jeria: It's the simplest thing. The virtual machine itself is kept in a file in your drive. You can then install an OS on it and off you go. Parallels has a trial -- I'd highly recommend you try it out. It's probably faster to try than to talk/read about :)

  by aral on 2006-06-20 08:53:33

• Aral, Did you get SUSE 10.1 to work with Parallels? I am considering the download, etc. of both Parallels and SUSE 10.1, but reports out there suggest 10.1 does not work - that you must install 10.0. Can you confirm if it worked or not w/ 10.1? Regards, Sean

  by Sean on 2006-07-20 05:30:24

• Just wondering if it is better than vmplayer from vmware... I never had a problem with this one...

  by zeflasher on 2006-07-20 22:09:15

• Hey, Sean: I had no trouble getting Suse 10.1 to run as the *Guest OS* under Parallels running on Windows XP. (Note: This was plain-vanilla Suse 10.1, not SLED.) zeflasher: From what I hear, Parallels is much faster.

  by aral on 2006-07-24 09:44:36

• I haven't been able to load SLED (SUSE LINUX Enterprise Desktop), version 10 DVD image, on my Macbook Pro running Parallels. The installation hangs towards the end during hardware detection. Rebooting gets SUSE running but the networking doesn't function properly. I have Fedora Core 5 and Windows XP running just fine. FC5 uses a kernel module called "ne2k-pci" which is what shows up under SLED. I've posted to Parallels forums, have submitted a tech support report to Parallels, and have been banging a bit on SUSE / Novell to try to figure this out. Without a network connection within the VM (the host OS, OSX, works just fine) I'm having a bit of a time trying to patch things, etc. although I can poke around the system (X windows / GNOME & KDE both work).

  by Charlie Lindahl on 2006-08-03 22:58:39

• Hi Charlie, That's not good to hear. I only tried it on my Windows machine but I'm going to be switching to a Mac in a week or so. I guess I can run Ubuntu -- but still, SLED is sweet and I was thinking of shelling out for it. Have you had any luck with plain old SUSE 10.1?

  by aral on 2006-08-04 15:01:39

• I'm running parallels on Suse 10.2... very impressive. Does anyone have any evidence as to which system has best prerformance? XEN, parallels, VMWare or MS Virtual machine?

  by Kristan on 2007-04-05 21:10:20

• I sometimes run Parallels on my C2D Macbook Pro - I've noticed the machine runs a LOT hotter running Parallels rather than just rebooting and switching to WinXp via bootcamp. Anyone else noticed this? CPU temp rises from 50C to 60C and higher, fans go nuts. - These stats are according to iStat widget

  by Sid on 2007-05-03 13:29:47

• Hi Sid, Parallels does hog the machine quite a bit so I'm not surprised.

  by aral on 2007-05-03 14:39:26

• Hi Aral, It's going from bad to worse - sometimes the windows partition completely disappears from my Mac OS X desktop and finder. Parallels will still launch without a problem though - very odd. After a reboot, everything is ok. Today the fans were maxing out at 6000rpm, temps crossing 65 before I shut down xp (on parallels). I know it's a resources hog, but is this type of performance to be expected?

  by Sid on 2007-06-19 13:45:36

• Has anyone had luck with the video in Parallels? I am stuck with VESA 800x600.

  by Dmac on 2008-01-03 19:11:34