iEmulator vs Parallels

[pmalm]

Has anybody here tried iEmulator (http://www.iemulator.com/), it's much cheaper than Parallels and I just wanna know is it worth of trying? Parallels is working just fine, but don't wanna buy it because it's somewhat expensive.

[exscape]

http://www.kju-app.org/blog/?p=6

In short:

It's the same app as the free (open source) application Q, with some other icons and stuff. So, get Q (from the link above) and try it out.

[Colonel]

I've used both iEmulator and Parallels, and out of my experience, Parallels wins BY FAR. iEmulator has poor native disk support, it feels slow because it doesn't take advantage of the Core Duo's VT, and it has a lack of drivers. Parallels has great disk support, feels almost native speed because of VT support, and has all of your necessary drivers.

[suleiman]

Not to mention Parallels has an industry leading support staff. And by industry I don't mean virtualization software manufacturers, I mean Computer Software manufactures in general.

[Virtualball]

I completely agree. Parallels staff actually goes onto there own forums to lear from problems and creates what people would like to be in the app (for the most part)

 

Its amazing! I wonder why most applications dont do that?

[fokker]

Parallels is that fast not only because it uses VT but beacause it don't emulate hardware, virtualization, instead of iemula...(Q) that emulates a x86 cpu. It seems that there's interest in porting the kqemu virtualization module to osx so this can change in time.

[sev7en]

Parallels can sports a professional developers team always-at-work due to commercial nature. iEmulator is free by the way... but less powerful as well as supported.