Parallels vs. Dual-Boot: What's Better For You?

[r_manic]

Yes, since everyone's into the whole Windows 7 thing, they've either turned their PCs into dual-boot machines or relied on virtualization software like Parallels.

As a newbie dual-booter myself, I've always wondered why people would run other OSes through virtual machines. Aren't the performance limitations a hassle, especially if they want to maximize the second OS? Since everything's practically on the x86 platform, I'm thinking virtualization has become even more unnecessary. Thoughts?

 

[mi1ez]

Our work network is half vista and half xp. I can't deal with rebooting every time i need to change. I would need 2 PCs if it wasn't for virtual PC.

At home I dual boot for speed and performance, but at work I need virtualisation. It does have a place.

 

[evongugg]

If you need to test software, virtualization is the way to go. You can undo your changes.

 

[MomoCC]

Good points guys! It's clear that mi1ez relies on Virtual PC, but maybe both of you have ideas on what's good virtualization software for a Windows PC?

 

[mactronix]

On the advice of a fellow forum member, (Thanks Wolf) I have XP on one drive and W7 on a differant drive.
This works well for me because when i want to use W7 i just hit the quick boot selection key F11 in my case, select the W7 drive and im away.
By default the machine will still boot XP and as my wife dosent like being asked questions like which OS to start it suits us fine.
I dont find it a chore and as each OS has its own drive there can be no MBR issues and if something goes big time wrong with the W7 drive its no big deal.


Mactronix