With virtualization, the software is basically offering the guest operating system a virtual copy of your Mac’s CPU and other hardware. UTM eases that pain, by intuitively setting the options to best suit the OS you’re running. The problem with QEMU is that it can be difficult to set up and configure. This is because UTM is built upon QEMU, a free and open source emulation software that’s been around for decades. To grok this difference, you need to know the difference between virtualization (which Parallels Desktop relies upon) and the emulation support offered by UTM. The core difference between the two tools, though, lies deep under the hood. On the other hand, UTM supports a bit more customization. Parallels Desktop tends to offer more bells and whistles that matter to the average user. They also perform similarly, although some reports indicate UTM offers better GPU performance. Parallels Desktop and UTM both serve very similar purposes.
The Core Difference Between Parallels and UTM: Virtualization vs Emulation Let’s explore both software packages to help you make that decision. You’ll need to think about what your specific needs are as far as running Windows virtually on your Mac. Both options have their own strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, there’s no easy answer to this debate. So, the question is, which will prove better at running Windows on your M1 or M2-powered Mac? Read on as I compare Parallels vs UTM on M1 and M2 Macs. Two of the easiest to use are Parallels Desktop and UTM. If you’re looking to run Windows on your Apple Silicon Mac, you have a few options.
0 kommentar(er)
