Rather than try map it all out, implement something basic and have it grow. You don't know what people will really want to do with this mode, and how they will learn to use it. It sounds a little arrogant to me to talk about how crummy the implementation of Parallels coherence mode is, and how difficult it might be for a user to figure out the difference between a Windows app (and file locations) and an OS X app. Is that it actually confuses non-technical users _a Like Coherence so far in VMware products (although anĮngineer at VMware came up with the idea 5 years ago) One of the reason we have never implemented something Say a Windows window in between two Mac OS windows. Their implementation (essentially just make the guestĭesktop transparent) which prevents inserting let's We like the idea of Parallels Coherence, but not Parallels publicly disclosed Coherence for the first time a week ago! At that time, engineers at VMware had already handed the beta Fusion build to QA at VMware! The fact that the feature is not there is a bit disappointing. One of the reason we have never implemented something like Coherence so far in VMware products (although an engineer at VMware came up with the idea 5 years ago) is that it actually confuses non-technical users \_a lot_: "Why do I see different files when I click File > Open in this application (a Windows app) and in that application (a Mac OS app)?", "Why does DnD sometimes open the same document and sometimes make a copy of it?".Īnd was eager to download the beta of Fusion to see if they had a better implementation. We like the idea of Parallels Coherence, but not their implementation (essentially just make the guest desktop transparent) which prevents inserting let's say a Windows window in between two Mac OS windows. I fully agree with you on the benefits of Coherence, In the meantime, anyone interested in a "Seamless" application experience of Windows application in Fusion (a la Coherence)? Remember, in Parallels you just do ONE click to activate the Seamless mode consider "simple" a solution that requires installing existing application - no compiling, no terminal commands) So you can state Parallels solution is a "layering hack", but it works with Windows XP, no question asked, no compiling required, no X11 and no 1500$+ Windows Server.Īnyone who can prove me wrong and come with a detailed configuration guide for the average user AND have multiple applications opened at the SAME time on a Windows XP Pro VM, be my guest. Not that I did not try it myself, but as I could not find a pre-compiled binary of a recent version of RDesktop for OSX, I can't test that part. I am using daily like 3 to 10 Windows applications at the same time, and unless you prove me wrong and provide a detailed working guide, Cedio SeamlessRDP is not gonna make it. And switching from Windows XP to Windows server 2003 with the Terminal Services mode enabled and like 10 concurrent licenses to support Cedio's solution is no option for the one-person company I am. Windows XP is limited to ONE RDP session, and I understand that the Cedio SeamlessRDP component opens like one session per application (so far the documentation says you start an application running : rdesktop -A -s "c:\seamlessrdp\seamlessrdpshell.exe notepad".
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |