Intel Macs and Xara

**corsair** · 21 February 2007, 10:20 AM

I'm contemplating changing to an imac. Which would mean losing my beloved Xara, unless I use an emulation programme or something. Can anyone tell me, because I haven't been able to find out, what difference it makes that the new iMacs have an Intel chip? Am I right that some windows programs will run straight in the mac os? I got that impression from a salesman in London, but he didn't seem to have complete info?
Any ideas?
Thanks
Fraser

**PhilM** · 21 February 2007, 10:52 AM

Hi Fraser,

You can run windows programs on Intel Macs in at least two ways (there may be other options):

1. Install Windows on a separate partition from Mac OS X using "Boot Camp". The advantage of this is that your Windows programs can use the full power of the dual core CPU but the disadvantage is that you have to reboot to switch between Windows and OS X.

2. Use "Parallels Desktop" to run Windows programs in the Mac OS X desktop. The latest version of this even runs separate Windows applications in their own Mac OS windows. The disadvantage of this though is that Parallels only emulates a single-core CPU and gives limited memory to Windows so your Windows applications don't run quite so fast.

PhilM

**Darwin** · 21 February 2007, 05:08 PM

Will parallels run win apps WITHOUT Windows installed? I was not aware of that... if it does, it sounds like Wine ported into OS X from Linux...

**jedfrechette** · 21 February 2007, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by Darwin

Will parallels run win apps WITHOUT Windows installed?

No. Parallels allows you to set up a virtual machine that you can install Windows on. Also note that the license of at least the Home version of Vista will not let you install it on a virtual machine. XP and earlier are fine though. As Phil noted this won't be quite as fast as running under Boot Camp, however, if you only need 2D applications (e.g. Xtreme) it should be fine. This is what I do and have no complaints. On the other hand, if you need 3D applications performance may not be acceptable as the virtual machine will not be hardware accelerated, at least for the time being.

VMware provides another virtualization option on Mac. This is actually the software I use and I have been very happy with it, although I haven't had a chance to play with the Mac version yet. Their Mac software, called Fusion, is currently available as a free beta. Just recently I set up a virtual machine on my Linux box, put it on a DVD, and mailed it to my sister halfway across the country so she could use it on her new Macbook. It was all very slick, did I mention I really like VMware? There have also been rumors circulating that when the final version of Fusion is released it will have 3d acceleration.

Originally Posted by Darwin

I was not aware of that... if it does, it sounds like Wine ported into OS X from Linux...

A commercial version of WINE called CrossOver Mac is available that may allow you to run some Windows applications without a copy of Windows. I use WINE for some things but have had mixed results overall. A free trial is available so you can check it out without commitment.

Depending on your specific needs you may need or want to use some combination of dual boot, virtualization, and WINE. This page gives a pretty good simple comparison of the various options:
http://www.codeweavers.com/products/differences/

**eobet** · 21 February 2007, 09:55 PM

Don't forget VMWare Fusion.

Running XP in a safe environment inside a window, instead of trying to integrate it into OS X like Parallels does. Makes me feel safer, at least.

And Xara runs fast under it too!

**davelash** · 21 February 2007, 09:59 PM

there have been several threads on this topic with many users sharing their experiences. Try searching the forum for "Mac Xara" and you'll get bushels.

Bottom line impression I've formed: Bootcamp dual machines prevent easy use of multiple cross-platform applications simulateously: you must reboot in the current version to access the other OS. The virtual machine solutions like Parallel slow down operations - some say 15 to 20% - but seem stable if you can tolerate the loss of some speed.

Warning: all this is heresy...I have no direct experience...a Mac version of Xara is on my Christmas list!

good luck!

**sunland** · 21 February 2007, 11:57 PM

eobet, I am not sure why you are so paranoid about parallels.
The mac integration you mention is a feature called Coherence, It is still in release candidate software and not final release, otherwise you do not have to choose that feature, you can run in window mode which I have been doing for about 6 months without a hitch. I basically only run Xara and it is fast for me. Parallels is running on a MacMini CoreDuo and it is much faster than the Pentium III I was running Xara on before.
So in terms of speed comparisons, what is being compared to what. Most reports I have read of realistic comparisons, show software running in Parallels just a bit slower than native.
The stable release version is just that stable and there many people running a variety of applications in different situations with good results.
It is good software.
adios

**corsair** · 22 February 2007, 05:54 AM

This has been fascinating and very helpful. Of course we wouldn't be having this discussion if Xara could get around to porting Xara for Macs.HINT...

At least now I know that, one way or another, I won't have to give up the best vector programme eve.
Thanks all,
Fraser - off to search the threads...

**gwpriester** · 23 February 2007, 01:48 AM

A good designer friend of mine just defected to the Mac. She was showing me Vista running under Parallels and I was pretty tempted to defect myself. (I didn't however and have ordered a new DELL instead).

Gary

**eobet** · 25 February 2007, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by sunland

eobet, I am not sure why you are so paranoid about parallels.

When Parallels was just unveilied and released, someone investigated what exactly was going on behind the scenes with this integration stuff, and what he found was that Parallels attached itself to vital parts of OS X in such a way that a crash could potentially bring down the entire machine.

I lost the link now, but that message made me not dare to try Parallels.

Now, VMware is the industry leading supplier of virtual machine software, and it contains the guest PC safely inside a window. VMwares products are widely used for debugging software and even running servers safely!

Parallels is a newcomer wanting to grab market (and money) away from VMware, and though I bet the software works, I'm sure they have taken some shortcuts in places in order to reach up to VMware's standards that fast.

Sorry, it might just be FUD but I'll stick with VMware for now.