[X4U] Re: Parallels vs. Boot Camp

[PoolMouse]

At 6:28 AM -0700 4/17/06, Jim Robertson wrote:
>On 4/15/06 10:35 AM, "PoolMouse" <poolmouse_nyc at mac.com> wrote:
>
>>  parallels is going to make heros of alot of sysadmins who
>>  provide/support it for their mac clients who need to run windows
>>  applications...um, unless citrix is available at the company. ;)
>
>I could here the bullet whiz by, but it didn't hit me. Could you rephrase
>your zinger so those of us struggling to use Windows frequently for the
>first time get your meaning? Especially the part about Citrix (I'm dealing
>with two cross-platform struggles that involve Citrix servers now).

boot camp is worthless for users who need to run windows 
applications. citrix is a great solution (as long as the server farm 
is robust and clinet is configured correctly). virtualization (right 
now parallels) gives us the ability to furnish users with a 
fast/solid windows system from which they can run windows apps. my 
gripe is that parallels uses an image instead of our boot camp 
partition.

virtual pc may be rewritten to use virtualization - but why should ms 
bother if parallels runs fine for $49? i'm sure microsoft will find a 
way to market a "better" vpc but i certainly don't see a need.

boot camp is good for gaming or anything else that's worth rebooting for.

don
-- 

don montalvo, nyc
curmudgeon at large