Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Re: reaching network drives through VPNunderXP Pro virtualized by Parallels on Mac OS X?

[Michael <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

I haven't bothered upgrading to Leopard yet - I'll let others work out the bugs and then switch. My iMac is my work computer so it's more important that it be stable than have the latest gee whiz features. None of the new features are that impressive anyway from what I've read about them.

The Fusion interface is pretty nice. In what ways is Parallels better? If anything I sort of wish that Fusion wasn't quite so oriented towards normal people. It's sacrificed some power for ease of use IMO. The only real nagging issues with Fusion is that it can act oddly with certain keystrokes and mouse combos - evidently if the host OS and guest OS are both trying to do something with them. Like the ERP software I use (Intuit/Activant Eclipse) is retarded and uses the F12 key to go back sometimes and it can act oddly in certain situations. It also annoys me that Fusion won't work as a remote console to the virtual machines I have running on my Linux server so to access them I have to run VMWare console inside a Linux or Windows VM running in Fusion. Doh! I don't suppose Parallels would work for that situation either though. :)

> So why Parallels instead of VMWare Fusion or some other VM product? I've
> been using Fusion for the past year and like it quite a bit. I usually run
> Linux, XP, and Win 2000 as guest OSs and it works really well.

Both are supposed to work, but at last word, Parallels had a slightly
nicer interface and better Leopard compatibility (and at least one
MLUGer endorsed it). It works really well so far. The VPN issue was
something stupid unrelated to Mac OS or Parallels.

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion