Digg

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Choosing Boot Camp or Parallels to Run Windows on an Apple MacBook

notebookreview.com — This article is an overview and comparison of two alternatives for running Windows on an Intel based Apple MacBook: Parallels or Boot Camp, which to choose? Pictures, benchmarks and video are included to demonstrate each Windows on a Mac solution.

Bury

technologyguide 2 years 171 days ago, made popular 2 years 170 days ago

1162 diggs
digg it

70 Comments
Who Dugg It?

Eztli, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Boot Camp.
* Native
* No overhead from the VM
* Can use ALL your RAM
- Durrok, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Boot camp is definetly the clear winner here for your standard desktop user.... however parallels offer some interesting things that might be useful to the administrator on the go.
- ZombieFlanders, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Boot Camp, but Apple should be cool and give the power settings drivers to the masses so that windows doesn't suck the MacBook's batteries dry at full speed...
  
  I noticed that parts like "Air Port" are actually have names like "Atheros AR5006 Wireless Network Adapter" (thus the potential to just find windows drivers for these items). But I can't figure out what the names of certain parts are, or Apple's 'version' is one number off and that product doesn't have a driver on its web page... shady (to me) little things like that pop up on these otherwise intel-based boards. Look...I don't care that the iSight doesn't work in Windows, but it would be nice to have my screensaver go on, the monitor turn off, and the ability to spin down the hard drive.
- wsewell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Yeah, and with Boot Camp you don't have to reboot.... oh wait you do.... hmm.... well maybe it's not so clear cut after all. It completely depends on what you want to do with Winbloze. Games == pretty much need bootcamp. Just need IE for the occasional crappy web site or some simple app not yet ported to OSX == Parallels is great.
- phlogiston99, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4Not sure why you need to run Winzzz when you bought a Mac in the first place. But in todays' market, it is pretty conceivable to buy more than on computer. Save the Mac for Mac stuff. And next, examine why you need windows. If you say games, just get a ps2/3/box/sphere/cube/psp from Sonyntendo/soft.
  
  What is the so-important-piece-of-software that you NEED and does not exist at all for Mac? (if it is a game, see previous point) Nothing? I thought so.
  
  I do my daily computing on different computers (Win/Mac/Linux) and I have yet to find an application that I needed and did not exist on a given platform.
- tokyopimp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@ phlogiston99
  
  You cannot just simply say, if you want to play games, get a console. Becuase RTS, Strategy, games like Civ 4 and Age Of Empires. Adventure games, and MMO's, do not really exist in the console realm. Not to mention the plethora of FPS games that are simply better on the PC thanks to the mouse and keyboard.
  
  Believe me, if PC gaming wasn't important, then MS wouldn't be supporting it like they are!
  
  Also, a lot of software I use isn't available for Mac. Such as FL Studio (yes I know there are comparable programs for Mac, but I've been using FL for almost 5 years). Foobar 2000 my extremely customized music player. I have been using Windows for over 10 years, I know my way around it better than any other OS. I don't get trojans, viruses, and spyware. I know the advantages of a Mac, I'm very experienced in OSX, and I like the operating system a lot. But I have a dual boot Ubuntu Windows XP system, and it suits all my needs.
  
  The only reason I would buy a Mac, would be if I ever had the need for a laptop, then no question I would buy a Macbook.
- shinynew, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@phlogiston99 i have a PC to use as a PC and to play PC games. I dont have a PS2/PSP/WII/XBOX to play PC games. Much like people dont have a Xbox 360 to play PS3 games (sorry for incudeing a myth in my comment)
antoniojvr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7I remember Leo Laporte debating this on a previous episode of TWiT. Does anyone know which way he went?
- reallyfatkid, on 10/12/2007, -72/+7That guy is a *****.
- Solidcell, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14Ah, but you're the catcher, bitch.
  
  Leo Laporte's socks are more interesting that you can ever hope to aspire to.
- reallyfatkid, on 10/12/2007, -18/+2@Solid
  
  I'd rather be a catcher than a gerontophiliac. Tell Leo to give you a reacharound next time he's all up in ya..
gleffler, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Also Boot Camp supports D3D whereas Parallels does not.
- robosport, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2... and, related, hardware accelerated OpenGL with Boot Camp. The article reminds us there is no hardware accelerated graphics of any kind with any virtualization solution.
CelticWarrior, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2I went boot camp. No regrets here. Although, i've only booted to xp 2x and that was to show friends... soo meh.
TruthElixirX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I don't see enough pros to warrant 80$ (or 40$ preorder) to go with Parallels instead of Bootcamp, which will be built in natively.
- mddleNameIsEarl, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I can think of one particularly compelling reason to go with Parallels instead of Bootcamp. If you are using Windows simply as a test development client against an OSX based server, you are going to need both operating systems to be running simultaneously- assuming, of course, that you only have one machine at your disposal. That way you can fire up IE in windows, and point it at whatever server you are running in OSX. This is particularly useful if you are testing OS based browser behaviour against server code- a very common developer task.
RomieZ, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4So this is on an Apple Macbook?! I have a hard time believing they can get Half-Life 2 to run at 41 fps, unless its on low everything for settings..
- sych0, on 10/12/2007, -8/+15na, its a dell macbook.
- RomieZ, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5I meant that it would seem more logical on a Mac Book Pro, with the better video card and all..
- althe3rduww, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Did you watch the video provided there? it seemed to run very well. It looked like 40 fps to me.
keylargodave, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Why does there need to be a choice. Parallels is cheap enough. I don't see anything violating the license agreement with MS for using the same copy of XP. Use the system that you need for the task you're trying to accomplish. I try and stay out of Windows as much as possible and only bring up either Bootcamp or Parallels when I need to do something that I cannot do under OSX.
- Kelmon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I totally agree. I'm planning to run both solutions. Parallels will be used 95% of the time but I'll install Boot Camp as well for the odd occasions when I want to play the few PC games that I own or if a virtualised solution won't work for a particular application. Since Microsoft will let you use the same copy of Windows on the same computer for both solutions it makes sense, for me, to install both.
imightbewrong, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2either way you've gotta admit its pretty cool, ten years ago i dont think anyone would have seen this coming
sspooner, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Parallels every time !
VM is the way to go, run Windows and OSX side by side, no comparison, unless you're thinking games ... which I don't.
davdav, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Parallels is better for everything except games
- autodata, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Agreed. Parallels is significantly more convenient and, with virtual desktops, it's like having two (or more) machines in one. I generally have 3 OS X desktops, 1 XP desktop and 1 Linux desktop , all running at full speed, networked and just a cube effect away. Beat that.
- shinynew, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Oblivion, BFME 2, halflife 2 e1, HL2,CS,SC,fallout,fallout 2 ,Civ 4, Fable, Quake 4 ect.
  all looking purty without slowing down.
- frizop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ Auto
  
  Minus the Linux and that's the way I run it, except I use my laptop monitor for XP and my desktop monitor for OSX. I look to my left and have everything I need from XP right there.
cmer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Parallels is what I chose... it is a lot more convenient because I don't have to reboot all the time, and I can do stuff in XP at the same time as I do stuff in OS X. However, I think Parallels lacks some great VMWare features... I just can't wait for VMWare for OS X!!!!!
nicklinus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1yea boot camp is the way to go for sure!
samdu, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Don't mind rebooting? Use BootCamp.

Don't want to reboot? Use Parallels.
- Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Yea but I can't help but get the feeling that Bootcamp is the safer option, when on the internet! ;)
- Hamletlere, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Ireland
  
  Bootcamp safer? I'm afraid you have that exactly backwards. Windows running under Bootcamp has access to all of the hardware, including the hard disk that contains OS X. A virus caught under this Windows can trash the entire machine.
  
  Under Parallels, Windows only has access to "virtual hardware". A virus might be able to trash the virtual harddisk, but in reality that is merely a file managed by OS X on the real harddrive. So a virus can't affect the machine at large.
Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3realyfatkid your a *****. :P
- reallyfatkid, on 10/12/2007, -11/+0eat ***** douche.
blacklilyninja, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2bootcamp is hell .. i have yet to get either xp or vista running in that. however

parallels is nice.. no games though

any advice on getting bootcamp to behave let me know
- elpayo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Boot Camp worked like a charm on the first try on my MBP.
  
  But for you:
  
  Back up your OSX, then reformat the drive and do a clean install of tiger, apply updates, then get Boot Camp and make your partition. Install xp. Play for a while. Then boot back into OSX and restore your backed up apps, docs etc using Migration Assistant.
enzomedici, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1bootcamp....that's like buying a Ferrari and driving it with a Toyota Prius engine.

Running Windows on your Mac is ridiculous.
- TheNik, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3"Man, the Prius is the Cadillac of Hybrids."
scriabinop23, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Hey --- i resent that comment. A toyota prius has more torque available at 0rpm than a ferrari, believe it or not.

I bet a Toyota prius can out-accellerate a ferrari at 0-15 !!!! hahahahah
- MacMixMaster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Ummm...No.
ditangquan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1parallels.... with 2gb of ram i can allocate 512mb to an ubuntu server that runs torrentflux. nice having a torrent server i can access from anywhere!
Lyph4, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Running windows on intel hardware is ridiculous? That's funny...

Personally, I was planning on using Boot Camp to boot into windows for gaming, but after I've done some research.. And most of the games I'd be playing exist for OSX already! For example, everything from Blizzard, Homeworld 2, and KotOR.

I used to hate macs, but I think it was only because I had never used them. After installing OSX on my Inspiron 4150, I'm a convert.
- Olle, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I _can't_ be a convert.
  
  I develop for Windows for a living so I need windows. I wish that I was developing for Java rather than C# for that very reason because I'm pretty tired of Windows XP and I'm not looking forward to Vista very much.
  
  But, with bootcamp I could buy a MacBook Pro. I'm currently mulling that over, trying to decide what to do.
ACalcutt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3We had a boot camp deminstration at work today. We wanted to test joining it to our domain. I found it funny when windows loaded and showed the "Press ctrl-alt-del to log on" we couldn't log on because we coudn't find what ctrl-alt-del on the mac was(since delete on the mac is actually backspace for windows)... The mac representatives told us there was a key comination but they didn't know what it was...lol
- somenice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2ctrl+shift+esc
  
  and right click is ctrl+shift+F10
  
  Awkward but useful
GirSaysDoom13, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2 "by reallyfatkid 38 minutes ago -25 diggs
That guy is a *****."

funniest. comment. ever.
completely wrong, i think leo is awesome, but i pissed myself laughing.

and has anyone seen half life 2 running on a macbook 2.0 ghz? it runs really nice, about 30-40 fps. my 2005 ibook is definately showing it's age, seeing as it can barely hold up a 5 fps rate for KOTOR.

HL2 on macbook:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpSAf56v1S4
- reallyfatkid, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I think you're the only one here who found that funny (as it was intended to be). Everyone else got defensive of their favorite tech-loving geriatric.
shawnz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Dumbest comparison ever. Booting windows xp versus booting windows xp in a vm.
- shawnz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Holy crap, just read the article. These guys are idiots. They can't honestly think resume time is boot time? And besides, thats not the preformance of boot camp, thats the preformance of XP itself. No digg.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It gives you a feeling for switch time though - if you are in OS X and want to move to Windows, how long will it take?
boredzo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"""
Apple present a quite glowing report on Parallels [even] though it's a relative newcomer to the Mac scene, here's a snippet from what they had to say about it on their software page (http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/system_disk_utilities/parallelsworkstation.html ):

"The most powerful, easiest-to-use, cost-effective desktop virtual PC solution available today. It empowers any user, from experienced professional developers to sales executives to casual home users, with the ability to create completely networked, totally secure independent, maximally stable virtual machines on a single physical machine."
"""

Those blurbs are submitted by the software publisher - in this case, Parallels, Inc.
safer9999, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I want to play games on Parallels!@@!!@@!@! I don't want to use BOOT CAMP. Parallels team please keep progarmming!!!!

Neal Saferstein
Doak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1 Can it run on a texas instruments calculator?
They are way better than what the woz has built.
And way more popular, BTW.
Books, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That was a really good article. Went into details about everything and anything.
althe3rduww, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't mean to break from the topic too much but did you see that performance with half life 2 on the macbook?!?! It has intel integrated graphics but it was running half life 2 at 40fps! That was fantastic! It looks like the people complaining about the video performance on the macbook need to shut up now.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I thought the article said it was a pro (which would make sense). The video may have been made before the "real" macbook was released.
- YoGramMamma, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The article mentioned expressely that is was NOT a macbook pro, but that the game demo should have probably been best shown on a Pro. This 30-40 fps was pretty impressive. If you watch the youtube video you can see the white bezel on the laptop with the iSight in the center. Its a macbook alright... integrated graphcis and all. I dont really game much, and I dont think 30-40 fps is anything to call home about, but from what i saw it was good looking, alot better than i thought it'd be, and i wonder what all those people were blabbering about when this thing first came with its integrated graphics and how they were SOOO horrible. Considering the fact that most people who game dont do so on 13 inch laptops, i think its pretty impressive.
sclifford, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I run BootCamp for games (Half-Life 2, FEAR, etc. - 30GB) and Parallels for browser testing (various versions of IE, Netscape, FireFox, Opera, etc. 38GB - the image is 26.4GB), Visual Studio stuff, and beta testing (MS Office 2007, etc.). I have to say that I'm very pleased with game performance under BootCamp and with app performance under Parallels. HL2 is gorgeous; I have everything turned to max (AA, AF), bloom and reflections, and have deathmatched quite a bit.

I just "switched" and bought a 17" MBP about three weeks ago. It's a delight. I opted for the 120GB HDD; still space is somewhat cramped. Since I mostly do webdev work games are secondary. Things can get pokey when I have a lot of apps running, so I'm going to bump up to 2GB of RAM from 1GB soonish.
.mark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1There's a good chunk of people who work for Apple who are big behind Parallels. I recently went to a large training seminar and they were all over Parallels as a product. I wouldn't be shocked at all if Apple didn't just purchase the rights and technology behind Parallels and implement it into the next operating system release.

Personally, I just use Boot Camp. I'm not too fond of Parallels, but to each their own.
- Focher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I suspect that what you will see in the next version of OS X will actually be closer to Parallels in end user functionality. If you read the Boot Camp pages they hint at integrated functionality. Before the download it says "More and more people are buying and loving Macs. To make this choice simply irresistible, Apple will include technology in the next major release of Mac OS X, Leopard, that lets you install and run the Windows XP operating system on your Mac."
  
  After the download it says "Thank you for your interest in features of the next version of Mac OS X, Leopard." I doubt they would describe the ability to dual boot the machine to another operating system to be a feature of OS X.
  
  My prediction is that you will be able to run the apps seamlessly inside of OS X. This would be similar to how OS/2 was able to run Windows applications.
NeoRicen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's pretty simple, if you want graphics heavy apps you NEED bootcamp otherwise parrallels is fine.
olivierk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why can't people understand that people have a use for both??
I have Parallels open at all times to use Visio/Word for my spec writing and that works beautifully! (need to collaborate with mostly PC users and there is no technical diagram cross-platform workflow).
When I need to run a video app or a game, I'll boot up in Boot Camp.
What we really need is a way for Parallels to use the Bootcamp partition so I don't waist HD space and run into licensing nightmares because I'm running 2 different PCs on one laptop!
althe3rduww, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think the end all solution would be if apple managed to do a parallels type solution for easy switching but managed to give the windows side access to the video card. That way you would have the best of both worlds. I suppose thats the incarnation of "have your cake, and eat it too".
ramsinks.com, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Right click? It's just two fingers on the touch pad.
;)

I'll run Ubuntu, XP and OSX. Just havnt decided in what way.
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Choosing Boot Camp or Parallels to Run Windows on an Apple MacBook

Login or register to add a comment