|
|
Posted by Mike Kujbida on 02/19/07 02:54
OK guys, this is getting very confusing. I was under the assumption
that
Bootcamp (not Parallels) would allow me to do anything I wanted. From
what
you're saying, it doesn't sound like it.
My plan was to get a Mac with 3 (internal) drives.
#1 (system drive) to be partitioned with Mac OS and XP Pro. The
system
would
come with FC Express HD. I'd be installing Vegas 7, Photoshop 7 and
CorelDraw 11 on the PC side of it, hopefully by using Bootcamp.
#2 (video drive) would be formatted for Mac use.
#3 (video drive) would be formatted NTFS for PC use.
I've got NTFS-formatted externals already (both USB and Firewire
400) that I'd like to continue using.
My hope in doing it this way is so that I could bounce files back and
forth
from the PC sideo to the Mac side and vice-versa.
Is this going to work like I had hoped or am I dreaming?
If I'm dreaming, then I'l l go with plan B (quad core PC).
Prices are comparable either way I go but I had kinda hoped to start
getting
into the Mac side of things.
Mike
p.s. irrelevant material snipped below
Smarty wrote:
> Spex,
>
> My original and correct point was (and is) the Parallels cannot see
> or use the 4 500GB drives in my MacPro and instead only makes use of
> a small, slow virtual disk unsuited for video. For some reason I have
> yet to understand, you took exception to this original statement.
> Your exception was clearly erroneous, your claim that my argument was
> invalid was erroneous, and your follow up reply then began NAME
> CALLING.
>
> My post was intended to point out to those like Mike who have yet to
> take the $4000 MacPro Quad Xeon plunge like you and I did that all is
> not so smooth and seamless as it is claimed to be when running video
> apps across Bootcamp and Parallels.
>
> These technical limitations are ***OF COURSE*** very obvious to me
> and to you as well, but it certainly is not at all obvious to people
> like Mike who don't own and don't use these products but are
> considering purchasing them. Whether it takes a genius to figure it
> out or not is irrelevant. This is all about experience and has little
> or nothing to do with genius. It is intended merely as helpful
> information, no more, no less.
>
> Not only does Parallels ***not*** provide any support whatsoever for
> other internal drives, it also does ***NOT*** allow access to
> external Firewire drives. Moreover, the Parallels support for USB
> connected drives to the Mac is very flakey based on a lot of trials I
> have done here, with Mac drives mounting mostly reliably (when
> MacDrive 6.5.1. is installed) and PC-formatted drives creating all
> sorts of problems with Parallels. For example, the drive mount and
> dismount / eject synchronization between the Tiger OS and the virtual
> Parallels / Windows XP OS has made several of my drives corrupted and
> unreadable.
>
>
>
> "Spex" <No.spam@ta.com> wrote in message
> news:45d8e4e9$0$8739$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...
>> Smarty wrote:
>>> joke for video work.....FAT32, 4GB max, etc.
>>>> We use MacDrive in Bootcamp and Parallels which makes your argument
>>>> invalid. For $50 it is a no brainer.
>>>>
>>> I also use MacDrive in Bootcamp. You misinterpreted what I said.
>>> MacDrive offers ***NOTHING*** to solve the problem I cited, namely,
>>> that Parallels cannot see any of the attached real hard drives, but
>>> only sees its' own virtual drive, which is tiny, slow, and FAT32.
>>> Maybe it's your argument that is invalid. ;-)
>>>> http://www.mediafour.com/products/macdrive6/bootcamp.asp
>>
>> Parallels only blocks access to internal drives.
>>
>>>>
>>>> Parallels is fine for office apps and testing cross platform web
>>>> applications. Parallels limitations are known and graphics/video
>>>> support is one of them and Parallels make no bones about that.
>>>> What is really required is GPUs with virtualisation technology too.
>>>>
>>> Exactly, and is ***NOT*** suited for doing video work, my original
>>> point.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|