Parallels Desktop is brilliant

Ever since fusion started going downhill since the acquisition of Broadcom, I started thinking of switching, finally took the plunge, and yes, it might not be the most accessible and require OCR at the start, but once you get windows installed, no need for OCR pretty much. Needless to say, I am not looking back.

Just to run windows on it? 😏

I would certainly use the mac to spell check. I would only use windows for playing windows audio games.

I only use windows to play audiogames and games which aren't available on the mac, but my job and everything else? I do it on the mac.

I suppose I could once again make compromises in order to run Doze on the Apple Silicon Mac, by using Parallels. But, yes, I'd not be madly in love with the idea, because I do think the UI isn't as convenient to use. But if it's really the only way, might have to. On my Intel iMac the first choice remains BootCamp, obviously.

you don't need to touch the UI if you don't want to. Other than installing windows, if you don't want to have to touch the UI again you don't have to, as you can customise keyboard shortcuts etc from the windows vm itself. Of course, if your up to mucking about in the UI, you will need ocr for some of the settings screens, well one in particular, that beeing the keyboard shortcuts for the vm, but even then you only need vocr to focus you on the table of keyboard shortcuts after which your voiceover commands to navigate the table will work as normal to uncheck and check the default keyboard shortcuts.

Sorry for the poster if I am hijacking the post. I donwloaded the app from the App Store and I am getting nothing in the first screen, VoiceOver says: kToolbarTitleLabelItemId text. Not sure what this means! Also when I use VOCR to get the screen it says Nothing Found.

So I get that parallels is probably the best option for virtualization as of now, but financially supporting a company that makes zero effort with regards to accessibility kind of rubs me the wrong way. Don't get me wrong - if I get to a point where I need to, I'd be hypocritical and bite the bullet, but I do think it wouldn't hurt to write them, especially if you're an existing customer, and tell them how you feel about the present state of their UI.

parallels work with M4 or M5 mac book pro?
and can we install windows 11 in there?
and after that can we use screen reader like NVDA?

only downside is there is the normal vm lag, it gotten much better over the years though, but the only reason I I don't use a vm with my mac rn is storage, if you want to run both macos and windows get at least 1TB, 500GB sounds fine until it isn't, it somehow flys away before you could blink.

can we install steam on windows in Parallels Desktop ?

Do such games run on VMWare? I'm asking because if they do that's probably the only real advantage VMWare has over Parallels at this point. If I could afford it and the accessibility kinks were ironed out, I would transition to Parallels right now.

According to Google, Parallels has the best support for direct decks and 3-D rendering. You won't be able to play every AAA game out there, but you will get better results with the ones you can play over other VMs.

Remote play from a console might be your best bet for gaming on the Mac.
@Oliver,
While I cannot speak for other Windows users, I play Xbox titles on my Windows 11 laptop, either via GamePass, or via 'Play Anywhere' titles.

I installed parallels and windows 11 and it is working great! Just a question, how do i check the windows preferences to make sure it has the correct ran and allowed disc space? Also how do i create an NVDA key or do I need sharp keys for this? Thanks,

Afternoon all,
I restarted the mac and VM and have no sound in windows 11 at all even though i had sound the first time i set up windows. How do i fix this? I am using it in full screen mode. Also in the menu bar I do not see the usual options under windows such as suspend, resume, restart. Any ideas?

Hi for those that have the spell check bug in Safari have you filed feedbacks with screen recordings showing the issue?

From what I read, the preference is not saving is a bug specific to parallels 26. I think someone recommended to download version 20, save your preferences, and then go back to parallel 26 with your preferences saved.

This is an interesting one. When i open windows apps or games like task manager, file explorer, and an audio game all of them appear when i command tab between apps. So instead of VO saying Finder, Mail, Messages and then going back to finder it says; Finder, Parallels, windows 11, task manager, messages, file explorer. Is this normal behavior? I could be wrong but I do not remember this happening in the previous version. I am using version 26.

Yes, it’s normal behavior, it’s just the mode you have set. By default, coherence mode is turned on, that’s why you see things like task manager, and other Windows apps when command tabbing. You can turn that off in settings of the virtual machine.

Is the pro version worth it if i have the standard m1 mac with 16 gb ram?

Hi!
Is any of us parallels users here also experiencing audio stuttering and buffering on windows?
I am running my windows via parallels on an m1 max Mac Book Pro, have allocated 32 gb of ram to windows and 6 processor cores. Rather often, the audio from windows stutererereerererererers a lot, making the whole system practically very hard to use in daily work.
Has anyone experienced this or found a reliable fix?
I've done the obvious, aka updating every bit in the chain, restarting everything. Connecting an external soundcard to windows directly results in the audio not buffering, but dropping out and completely disappearing for around 10 seconds occasionally.
Since nobody is talking about this, I assume you don't experience such stutters?

Indeed. Getting it several times per hour, often several times during 5 minutes or so, and thats considerably limiting my work and usecase. So far, Parallels support has also been wonderfully silent on this :)

Yes, its Parallels pro, as the regular one caps the resources you can allocate. The issue is applied to the whole guest OS input and output, so there is definitely something wrong in the parallels audio stack.

Hi,
can someone make a Podcast to get setup with Parallels and get up and running?
It would be appreciated.
Thanks

I brought that subject up some time ago, and a few people immediately jumped me, one of whom with personal attacks even, so that's how defensive some blind people can get about their choice to economically support software whose developers have actively demonstrated to not care about accessibility for over a decade now. That coupled with the irony in lots of ridiculous praise mixed with complaints about keyboard settings not saving or stuttering audio is at the very least comedy in the making, especially when the only feature that Parallels actually has going for it is configuring and enabling the unattended mode of the Windows installer, which apparently is worth at least $60 per year for those people.

I don't think it’s screenreader based, as i'm using NVDA without any studdering or audio dropping out. To be fair though; I only use elequense as my NVDA voice and since others have mentioned using the natural sounding voices, this could very well be the culprit, at least that's what its sounding like, if I had to guess. My mac is a m3 pro, with the m3max chip, 14 or so cores, don't remember off the top of my head, and 36 gigs of ram. And yes; i'm using Parallels standard, so 8 gigs of ram, and i'm not getting studdering; which is why I say likely natural sounding voices are the likely culprit here; to those who are getting this; what screen reader and voice are you using? And to those that aren't getting this; same question. The only other possibility that comes to mind is its a bug with parallels 26 that only affects if you made your vm on version 26 instead of a earlier version but again; I don't think that's the case.

So as per the comment above, one needs a $4000 machine with at least a $60 yearly inaccessible software subscription to even get close to the experience provided by a $120 machine. Totally reasonable!

You’re taking this completely out of context — and honestly, that’s a bad-faith jab if I’ve ever seen one. My comment wasn’t about bragging or hardware cost; it was about isolating variables to figure out why some people experience audio stuttering in Parallels and others don’t. Another user with a 32-gig M1 setup — a system that costs about the same and was mentioned well before I even commented — reported the same issue. So clearly, this isn’t a “$4000 computer” thing. It happens across both cheaper and more expensive Macs.

The point I was making is that it mite, per what other users are saying about using natural voices; come down to voice processing,or possibly how Parallels 26 handles newly created VMs, or something of the sort but Hardware cost has zero relevance to that. You’re twisting a technical discussion into a moral or economic one, which doesn’t make sense in this context.

And let’s be real — you didn’t say a word when someone else mentioned their $4000 setup, but the moment I chime in, suddenly it turns into a lecture about “blind people defending inaccessible software.” That says a lot about intent. You even dragged this into another thread previously, claiming you’d been “personally attacked” for bringing it up which, let’s be clear, didn’t happen. But if twisting that narrative helps you sleep at night, that’s on you, not me; and yeah that was clearly meant to be a jab at me, don't think I didn't notice it.

Maybe next time, read what people are actually saying before throwing around sarcastic comments. I’m trying to troubleshoot based on observed behavior and system variables, because there has to be a reason why some get it and others don’t — maybe a particular setting, like being in coherence mode versus not, for example. But the whole “oh yeah, you have to buy a $4000 Mac to not have these problems!” take? That completely misses the point of the discussion. Big difference.

I do, but I have heard of others who don't have it on when using the vm. Its on a case by case basis, but i've never had any problems if voiceover is simultaneously running with the vm.

I am using eloquence as well.
Based on your replies, I've gathered that this is something unique with my system. Have to wait for Parallels support to take a peek at this, and if they fail, I might see a windows reinstall in my future.
Will keep this thread updated in case someone else runs int othat issue.

If it comes to the cost vs effectiveness, there is probably a reason people here combine Mac and Windows. I can't vouch for others, but I did invest into the hardware because Apples hardware is rock solid, and works flawlessly. My work involves quite a bit of audio processing, where the MacOs brilliant audio stack shines. Running local language models and transcribers is also a breeze. Not to mention the quality of life features such as Airdrop, iMessage, FaceTime ETC.
Sadly, the MacOs software side, with VoiceOver, as we all know is less than ideal. Depending on what you do, it just isn't sufficient in several cases.
Regarding supporting inaccessible software, similar argument could be made against MacOs and VoiceOver, where apple has brought nearly zero meaningful updates to the screen reader in years. interestingly, people keep buying macs and using VoiceOver.
SO, as long as it works, let everybody use what they want.

You’re taking this completely out of context — and honestly, that’s a bad-faith jab if I’ve ever seen one. My comment wasn’t about bragging or hardware cost; it was about isolating variables to figure out why some people experience audio stuttering in Parallels and others don’t. Another user with a 32-gig M1 setup — a system that costs about the same and was mentioned well before I even commented — reported the same issue. So clearly, this isn’t a “$4000 computer” thing. It happens across both cheaper and more expensive Macs.

The context is the comment that I replied to in my first comment to this thread, I did not bring it up this time, only commented on what happened the last time I did it.

The point I was making is that it mite, per what other users are saying about using natural voices; come down to voice processing,or possibly how Parallels 26 handles newly created VMs, or something of the sort but Hardware cost has zero relevance to that. You’re twisting a technical discussion into a moral or economic one, which doesn’t make sense in this context.

I'm being sarcastic, just in case that went over your head, because as I said earlier, and explained why, this whole thread is comedy in the making.

And let’s be real — you didn’t say a word when someone else mentioned their $4000 setup, but the moment I chime in, suddenly it turns into a lecture about “blind people defending inaccessible software.” That says a lot about intent. You even dragged this into another thread previously, claiming you’d been “personally attacked” for bringing it up which, let’s be clear, didn’t happen. But if twisting that narrative helps you sleep at night, that’s on you, not me; and yeah that was clearly meant to be a jab at me, don't think I didn't notice it.

My first comment actually happened before you mentioned your setup, and as for personal attacks on the other thread, if you don't think that your comment regarding my credibility, independence, and attitude, whose personal nature I called out right away aren't personal attacks, then don't let me distract you away from your delusions!

Maybe next time, read what people are actually saying before throwing around sarcastic comments. I’m trying to troubleshoot based on observed behavior and system variables, because there has to be a reason why some get it and others don’t — maybe a particular setting, like being in coherence mode versus not, for example. But the whole “oh yeah, you have to buy a $4000 Mac to not have these problems!” take? That completely misses the point of the discussion. Big difference.

I did read the whole thread actually, and the conclusion that I reached, is that the brilliant software that people are totally willing to pay a yearly subscription for apparently has a lot of problems that extend beyond accessibility. Your attempts to debug it also add to the amusement since I've never actually read anyone put that much effort into addressing their perceived problems with any of the other competing yet free and accessible solutions.

Editing because I accidentally pressed Return on the Subject field, causing the form to be submitted long before I was done composing and switching to Markdown for the quotes.

Sadly, the MacOs software side, with VoiceOver, as we all know is less than ideal. Depending on what you do, it just isn't sufficient in several cases.

Not sure what cases you are referring to, so until we can debate those, I will just assume that you did not research any alternatives, because I've never had any trouble doing anything on macOS. VoiceOver does have problems and so does the accessibility infrastructure, however that doesn't make either of them insufficient for anything. I can somewhat accept arguments about productivity applications like office suites, but not completely given that there are perfectly viable and accessible professional alternatives like Markdown, LaTeX, and Typest, that you can use to produce properly formatted documents with pandoc, or database management options like PostgreSQL that you can and should use in place of spreadsheets. Both of these solutions are significantly more reasonable workarounds than having to resort to computer vision to work around the inaccessibility of a paid virtualization software solution just so you can run an also paid operating system, because as it stands, this is shaping up to be a perfect example of the classic XY problem.

Regarding supporting inaccessible software, similar argument could be made against MacOs and VoiceOver, where apple has brought nearly zero meaningful updates to the screen reader in years. interestingly, people keep buying macs and using VoiceOver.

I think that you are confusing accessibility with usability. To my knowledge the level of accessibility of all first-party Apple software is close to 100%, and that includes the whole boot process which is totally inaccessible on other platforms, so while there are many cases in which VoiceOver doesn't behave as well as it should even with first-party software, I don't think that there are any examples of accessibility hurdles that would definitely require vision to overcome on a Mac. By vision here I also include computer vision in the form of machine learning models or more classical optical character recognition heuristics, which from what I gather, are absolutely required to use the apparently totally inaccessible virtualization solution that people are praising on this thread.

If you have to use a computer vision solution to use some software because it doesn't convey enough information through the accessibility infrastructure to be usable with standard screen-reader interactions, then that software is inaccessible, and this distinction is the main reason why I actually use a Mac as my daily driver. I know that with a Mac I am never left in a situation requiring vision with Apple software, which is especially important to me since I live alone.

I suggest we don't rise to his comments, as tempting as it may be. He's made his views clear and is obviously upset that others do not share them. It's trolling. Engaging directly will only derail the purpose of this conversation.

When arguments falter, attack the poster! The reason why I decided to finally comment here was to point out the insane level of absurdity in this thread, and since tackling the subject in a respectful manner did not work in the previous thread, I decided to use sarcasm to expose the irrationality this time. You are perfectly free to just ignore my comments if you don't understand them and for some reason feel bad about asking for clarification, but I think that attacking me instead of my arguments and attempting to rally other users against me is over the line.

So going back to the basics, who here has even tried NVDA's remote access to talk to either cheap hardware that is also perfectly capable of running non-Pro versions of Windows 11, or at least an existing free alternative virtualization solution, before deciding to pay for a subscription to inaccessible software and a Windows license? To those who did try NVDA remote, why did it not work for you? To those who did not try NVDA remote, why did you not research that option first? The issue here is that it sounds like that people are jumping on the paid inaccessible option without considering anything else because someone has been consistently spreading misinformation about its actual value, and then those people ended up spending just more time trying to make the paid solution work for them than they ever spent with any of the free alternatives, and that's when that the free alternatives were even considered.

Dude, with all due respect, what are you talking about? Like I literally do not understand the question you're asking. NVDA Remote requires Windows.

So I'm supposed to run Windows to connect to another Windows machine? Why? I'm already running Windows. I feel like you're saying we don't need Parallels on Mac because NVDA Remote, and I am just confused about how this makes any sense whatsoever. Maybe you're talking about some *other* supposedly inaccessible software, I dunno. But I am clearly missing something here.

As I understand it, NVDA remote is used to control another Windows machine through one's own Windows installation. In no way is it going to act as a solution for someone who wants to use Windows without actually running it either natively or via VM. I've only ever seen it used to troubleshoot computer issues, so maybe I'm missing something. in any case NVDA remote, and the analogous feature on Jaws, isn't for that kind of use case. Better to just get a windows PC or install a VM. Also, I think this debate about blind people who support causes you don't agree with isn't really helping. Not that I necessarily disagree, and one should try to put one's money where one's mouth is But at the end of the day we all use what works, and even principles have to bow to necessity sometimes. I hope this isn't taken as a personal attack. Arguably, I don't have any stake in this; I use VMWare and it mostly works ... for now. but at some point, probably when VMWare fusion becomes quite unusable I may be forced to move to another VM, so I keep an eye on this thread.

Dude, with all due respect, what are you talking about? Like I literally do not understand the question you're asking. NVDA Remote requires Windows.

I'm talking about an earlier comment to this thread, in which I pointed out the ridiculousness of potentially needing a $4000 computer with a $60 inaccessible software yearly subscription to run a $200 operating system, and all this just to get remotely close to the experience of using a $120 computer that already ships with everything. It's clear to me that your lack of understanding stems from replying without contextualizing yourself with the thread.

So I'm supposed to run Windows to connect to another Windows machine? Why? I'm already running Windows. I feel like you're saying we don't need Parallels on Mac because NVDA Remote, and I am just confused about how this makes any sense whatsoever. Maybe you're talking about some other supposedly inaccessible software, I dunno. But I am clearly missing something here.

No, there are several unofficial NVDA Remote Access clients available to choose from for all kinds of platforms. I've never used them so I'm not claiming that they actually work, but apparently so has no one else on this thread, because from what I gather paying to debug inaccessible proprietary software makes a lot more sense than looking for viable alternatives.

Hi all,

Let's please try and get this thread back to supporting users of Parallels. While Parallels obviously is not the solution for everyone wanting or needing to run Windows on a Mac, it does have a user base in our community who has gotten it to work to their satisfaction. Whether or not to support the company given their seeming uninterest in accessibility is a worthy debate... For its own dedicated thread, and anyone who wishes to continue this debate is welcome to create such a topic.

The topic of this thread is the display of praise for an inaccessible proprietary paid virtualization solution that apparently is also broken in some cases, so my apologies for tackling it head on!