<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Parallels vs VMWare: Which solution runs Windows faster?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/</link>
	<description>Top Apple and Mac news and views</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:09:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Erickson</title>
		<link>http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/comment-page-1/#comment-65331</link>
		<dc:creator>David Erickson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:26:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mac.blorge.com/?p=3749#comment-65331</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just installed Parallels 5 on my iMac, having upgraded from ver 4. I have noticed a notable speed increase in running all my windows apps, including Office 2007. Before, I seemed to be waiting a lot longer, for the programs to execute, and would get a lot of &quot;not-responding&quot; messages when using my Access Database on my network. Not only is the speed increase noticeable (Win 7) but all network applications run flawlessly. My only negative is the $49.95 upgrade fee when I had just purchased the full version July 1.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just installed Parallels 5 on my iMac, having upgraded from ver 4. I have noticed a notable speed increase in running all my windows apps, including Office 2007. Before, I seemed to be waiting a lot longer, for the programs to execute, and would get a lot of &#8220;not-responding&#8221; messages when using my Access Database on my network. Not only is the speed increase noticeable (Win 7) but all network applications run flawlessly. My only negative is the $49.95 upgrade fee when I had just purchased the full version July 1.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/comment-page-1/#comment-49846</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 08:36:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mac.blorge.com/?p=3749#comment-49846</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[VM Ware Fusion works fine, but when it comes to gaming, Parallels is the clear winner. I couldn&#039;t play Warcraft 3 on VM Ware because all the controls, resolution and screen were messed up. With parallels? No problem. Other software&#039;s like Office, Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, etc seemed to work fine on both. Plus, I really love the &#039;Coherence&#039; functionality by Parallels.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>VM Ware Fusion works fine, but when it comes to gaming, Parallels is the clear winner. I couldn&#8217;t play Warcraft 3 on VM Ware because all the controls, resolution and screen were messed up. With parallels? No problem. Other software&#8217;s like Office, Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, etc seemed to work fine on both. Plus, I really love the &#8216;Coherence&#8217; functionality by Parallels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: permivan</title>
		<link>http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/comment-page-1/#comment-41690</link>
		<dc:creator>permivan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mac.blorge.com/?p=3749#comment-41690</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jan, it&#039;s strange to hear that, because I have absolutely opposite experience.

I used to work with both Fusion and Parallels and the first seemed to be slower for my needs - Word, Outlook and some windows-only apps.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jan, it&#8217;s strange to hear that, because I have absolutely opposite experience.</p>
<p>I used to work with both Fusion and Parallels and the first seemed to be slower for my needs &#8211; Word, Outlook and some windows-only apps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jan Morren</title>
		<link>http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/comment-page-1/#comment-40693</link>
		<dc:creator>Jan Morren</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mac.blorge.com/?p=3749#comment-40693</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I installed both versions on my MacBook Pro, and I must say, that VM Ware Fusion works best for my needs. With Parallels I felt the Mac to be alot slower, than now that I use Fusion. 
Together with Spaces, it works for me. 
I do not like to run Windows at all, but I have to at work.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I installed both versions on my MacBook Pro, and I must say, that VM Ware Fusion works best for my needs. With Parallels I felt the Mac to be alot slower, than now that I use Fusion.<br />
Together with Spaces, it works for me.<br />
I do not like to run Windows at all, but I have to at work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil Anderson</title>
		<link>http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/comment-page-1/#comment-40610</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:02:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mac.blorge.com/?p=3749#comment-40610</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Macworld reviewed VirtualBox 2.1.4

http://www.macworld.com/article/139261/2009/03/vbox21.html?lsrc=rss_reviews]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Macworld reviewed VirtualBox 2.1.4</p>
<p><a href="http://www.macworld.com/article/139261/2009/03/vbox21.html?lsrc=rss_reviews" rel="nofollow">http://www.macworld.com/article/139261/2009/03/vbox21.html?lsrc=rss_reviews</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Derrick Dodson</title>
		<link>http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/comment-page-1/#comment-40602</link>
		<dc:creator>Derrick Dodson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 16:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mac.blorge.com/?p=3749#comment-40602</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What about virtual box a free opensource solution??]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What about virtual box a free opensource solution??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://mac.blorge.com/2009/03/16/parallels-vs-vmware-which-solution-runs-windows-faster/comment-page-1/#comment-40601</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 16:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mac.blorge.com/?p=3749#comment-40601</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What about Sun&#039;s FREE VirtualBox? Please run a spped comparison if it as well. It seems faster than either VMware or Parallels, as substantiated by my running Windows7 in a VM using VirtualBox on a Dell mini 9. It may not be as feature complete, but I am testing it as a replacement for VMware in a corporate environment where it is giving me headaches...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What about Sun&#8217;s FREE VirtualBox? Please run a spped comparison if it as well. It seems faster than either VMware or Parallels, as substantiated by my running Windows7 in a VM using VirtualBox on a Dell mini 9. It may not be as feature complete, but I am testing it as a replacement for VMware in a corporate environment where it is giving me headaches&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
