Comments on: The Problem I Have with Parallels http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels The Weblog of Erik J. Barzeski Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:01:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: kdf http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels#comment-19313 kdf Mon, 11 Sep 2006 15:56:25 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels/#comment-19313 The other problem with Windows guest OS' is that NTFS filesystem support is not very robust for Linux or OS X so even if you could have Parallels run off another partition, it may not do much good as neither OS X nor Windows can read/write off the other partition without changing one to FAT32. The other problem with Windows guest OS' is that NTFS filesystem support is not very robust for Linux or OS X so even if you could have Parallels run off another partition, it may not do much good as neither OS X nor Windows can read/write off the other partition without changing one to FAT32.

]]> By: Virtualization engineer http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels#comment-19312 Virtualization engineer Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:58:56 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels/#comment-19312 The problem with direct drive access is that the host OS may/will try to access the VM drive at some point. If said drive has partitions formated in a filesystem the host OS can read/write (as is the case with MacOS support for Windows filesystems) it will happily mount them. This will lead to corruption since you have now 2 operating systems writing directly to the drive at the same time. Even if the VM is suspended it will corrupt the partition the moment you resume it. If MacOS has some way to blacklist drives from automounting, then go for it. The problem with direct drive access is that the host OS may/will try to access the VM drive at some point. If said drive has partitions formated in a filesystem the host OS can read/write (as is the case with MacOS support for Windows filesystems) it will happily mount them. This will lead to corruption since you have now 2 operating systems writing directly to the drive at the same time. Even if the VM is suspended it will corrupt the partition the moment you resume it. If MacOS has some way to blacklist drives from automounting, then go for it.

]]> By: Ralph Scheuer http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels#comment-19311 Ralph Scheuer Mon, 11 Sep 2006 08:24:38 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels/#comment-19311 Update: Apparently, that feature is coming. From their FAQ: Is it possible to access a physical partition or HDD from a Parallels Workstation 2.1 virtual machine? At the moment you can share the files or directories by means of primary OS via SMB or FTP and then access them from the Virtual Machine via the network. Direct mounting of the physical partitions into the Virtual Machine is in scope for future versions of Parallels Workstation. Update: Apparently, that feature is coming. From their FAQ:

Is it possible to access a physical partition or HDD from a Parallels Workstation 2.1 virtual machine?
At the moment you can share the files or directories by means of primary OS via SMB or FTP and then access them from the Virtual Machine via the network. Direct mounting of the physical partitions into the Virtual Machine is in scope for future versions of Parallels Workstation.

]]> By: Ralph Scheuer http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels#comment-19310 Ralph Scheuer Mon, 11 Sep 2006 08:15:17 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels/#comment-19310 I have always seen the image as an advantage: no malware can currupt your hard disk, backing up can be done through the Finder with drag and drop, the image becomes only as large as it really needs to and does not waste any space from the Mac OS perspective. In fact, I seem to be unable to notice any disadvantage with it (apart from the fact that the virtualized Windows cannot be booted natively, but I would not want to do that anyway. However, I can see situations where one would want that (gaming, flashing a cell phone firmware etc.). Is there any other reason why one would _not_ want a disk image? I have always seen the image as an advantage: no malware can currupt your hard disk, backing up can be done through the Finder with drag and drop, the image becomes only as large as it really needs to and does not waste any space from the Mac OS perspective.

In fact, I seem to be unable to notice any disadvantage with it (apart from the fact that the virtualized Windows cannot be booted natively, but I would not want to do that anyway. However, I can see situations where one would want that (gaming, flashing a cell phone firmware etc.). Is there any other reason why one would _not_ want a disk image?

]]> By: extra88 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels#comment-19309 extra88 Mon, 11 Sep 2006 04:18:21 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels/#comment-19309 Keep an eye on the VMWare workstation for Mac beta. I believe VMWare on other platforms can use either disk images or real drives so I would expect the Mac version to have such a feature as well.. Keep an eye on the VMWare workstation for Mac beta. I believe VMWare on other platforms can use either disk images or real drives so I would expect the Mac version to have such a feature as well..

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels#comment-19308 Erik J. Barzeski Mon, 11 Sep 2006 02:12:33 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels/#comment-19308 DeLynn, that's not an attractive option, no. DeLynn, that's not an attractive option, no.

]]> By: DeLynn Berry http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels#comment-19307 DeLynn Berry Mon, 11 Sep 2006 01:11:15 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels/#comment-19307 Is making the disk image ~250GB and storing it on the separate disk not an attractive option? Is making the disk image ~250GB and storing it on the separate disk not an attractive option?

]]> By: John C. Welch http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels#comment-19306 John C. Welch Mon, 11 Sep 2006 00:39:27 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/09/10/the_problem_i_have_with_parallels/#comment-19306 They solve different problems. Parallels, and indeed pretty much any virtualization product uses disk image files. They provide portability, and fast restoration in the case of an error that you cannot get from a partition. They solve different problems. Parallels, and indeed pretty much any virtualization product uses disk image files. They provide portability, and fast restoration in the case of an error that you cannot get from a partition.

]]>