Mostly we code...sometimes we write. Every once in a while, we podcast.

Very good! Although a bad advertisement it is advertisement and their comparison gives you visibility. Now many will know that Crossover exists. Also, if they take the time to do this page, is because Crossover is something that is grabbing users from them.

This is all good.

Crossover is always my first attempt at running a windows software on my Mac. If that doesn’t work, I try to find a MacOS alternative because I just don’t like using parallels.

Ugh! Yes, Parallels bad marketing... Let's match them in a very childish manner... Let's use snark to make it all alright... ;)

Crossover and Parallels are both tools, each used in a different way. I use both, and to be honest they have very little overlap. Sure i can use an excavator to nail in nail, but the better tool for that is a hammer. I could use a shovel to dig up a large yard, but an excavator is a better tool for that.

Parallels is for creating a whole VM, that absolutely has it's uses! Be it Windows, another MacOS instance, or whatever flavour of Linux.

Crossover is great if you want to run a Windows application on MacOS (or Linux), that is supported. Not everything is supported though, and sometimes even if it is supported it runs horrible. If it runs perfectly with Crossover, great! If it doesn't or runs horribly, you could run it on a Parallels VM, which has a TON of disadvantages, like takes more room, OS/VM overhead, additional translation layers, etc.

For example, before I moved to MacOS last year, I was a big user of Notepad++, it runs horribly via CrossOver, I could start running a Parallels VM for that, or I could look into other tools that do work well natively under MacOS... Sometimes the solution is looking for another solution. In this case my solution is MS OneNote, MacOS Notes, TextEdit, Sublime Text, and Beyond Compare (still considering licenses for those last two), depending on the task.

Instead of getting into a hair-pulling match with Parallels, just concentrate at what CrossOver is good at. CrossOver != Parallels and Parallels != CrossOver.

On the positive side I've never heard of Parallels (I mean, I've heard of VMware and VirtualBox), so you're probably pretty safe. I did see the problems you listed in Virtualbox. Lots of disk space and overhead, need to have Windows. the length of time it takes for Virtualbox to load windows and then your application is a real pain, especially if you are going into and out of it often. On the one hand, VirtualBox and Windows will probably run the application all more consistently, whereas with Crossover it's iffy (I mean things like MSOffice and Turbotax just won't run on Crossover). But, when an application (Quicken, etc) runs on Crossover, it's just really nice and fast compared to VM/Virtualbox)

I will say, I do very much prefer CrossOver over Parallels but what I think people have to remember is that both are good at doing different things. It's like the whole Apple vs Android debate: Both are good at doing various things.

In this case, CrossOver is good at utilising their amazing version of Wine, to allow you to run Windows apps on Mac/Linux. Parallels is good for virtualising Windows on Mac.

One small issue I have, however, is that this article mentions how Parallels may have reduced performance due to the emulation overhead. Wouldn't CrossOver have that too, because of Wine being a translation layer? (Correct me if I'm wrong - I don't know much about translation vs emulation/virtualisation)

Bradlee Barnes wrote:

I will say, I do very much prefer CrossOver over Parallels but what I think people have to remember is that both are good at doing different things. It's like the whole Apple vs Android debate: Both are good at doing various things.

In this case, CrossOver is good at utilising their amazing version of Wine, to allow you to run Windows apps on Mac/Linux. Parallels is good for virtualising Windows on Mac.

One small issue I have, however, is that this article mentions how Parallels may have reduced performance due to the emulation overhead. Wouldn't CrossOver have that too, because of Wine being a translation layer? (Correct me if I'm wrong - I don't know much about translation vs emulation/virtualisation)

There is less overhead with Crossover. This is because CO is a translator, whereas Parallels is an emulator. What this means is that CO only has to execute a set of instructions once. An emulator has to process a set of instructions twice. Since it has to do twice the work, there is an overhead in using a VM that isn't there if you use a translator.

There should be a small correction regarding the pricing comparison. The standard edition of Parallels is NOT subscription based. Just like Crossover, you can purchase the standard edition of Parallels and not renew after a year. It will still work, but a user will not get any updates. The Pro version is a yearly subscription and will stop working if you do not renew, as the comparison table states.

Addition to the "Play Windows games on a Mac" section:

CrossOver supports DX11, DX12, and Vulkan. I can even play ray tracing game in CrossOver at 90% of native performance (tested with Control: Ultimate Collection on M4 Max, comparing to native macOS version). The DX11 performance in CrossOver is even more impressive. It can reach 90~95% of native performance (tested with Zenless Zone Zero on M4 Max, comparing to native Windows installation with 4060Ti).

Parallels Desktop lacks DX12 and Vulkan support. Their DX11 performance is also very bad, less than half frame-rate compared with CrossOver (tested with GTA V, WATCH_DOGS, and Genshin Impact on M4 Max).

Really good comparison, parallels tries to push ads even into their free products while crossover doesn’t have any ads.

ROFL 🤣 at "every website out there nowadays has one of these 'comparison charts' showcasing how their 'AmazingApp X' leaves 'SadSoftware Y' in the dirt." That line alone made my day!

I’ve been using CrossOver Linux for about 6 months now — and let me say this upfront: it’s been flawless, especially with Scrivener, which was my main reason to even bother with a Windows layer. The performance? Smooth. The setup? Shockingly easy. And the experience? Way better than I expected. No VM, no Windows license, no bloat — just install and go.

Funny thing is, I actually stumbled across CrossOver earlier in my Linux journey, but when I needed it the most, I just couldn’t recall the name. I tried 1–2 other Windows "emulator" tools, and let me tell you — it felt like wandering alone in a desert, with nothing in sight except broken expectations and command line errors.

Frustrated, I gave up. Then it struck me to ask ChatGPT: "Which is that company whose owner gave the company to its employees?" — and boom, the bell rang: CodeWeavers! That was it!

Downloaded the free trial and… not even halfway through the trial, I bought the full CrossOver Linux. I couldn't be happier with that decision. It’s just solid. No Windows overhead, no malware worries, and no dual-boot madness. I love that it feels like a native app — because it practically is, thanks to Wine.

And beyond just the tech — I love what CodeWeavers stands for. Open-source contributions, ethical values, and actual real humans behind support (and humour). In a world of bloated software subscriptions and lock-ins, CrossOver is refreshingly straightforward.

So yeah — charts are fun, but real-world experience like this is what makes the difference. Keep up the awesome work, folks!

No, parallels desktop doesn't have a standard perpetual license anymore. There are only those two subscription versions since 2022. And since then, no relevant features... no directx 12 support... no roadmap... nothing... Since M1 Macs were released, Apple said that bootcamp-like Windows support is up to Microsoft. It would be a much better option than greed Parallels Desktop subscription.

For those that are interested: VMWare Fusion is free to use (since ~last year)--and is just as friendly and capable as Parallels. If CrossOver doesn't work for you, I'd recommend it over Parallels.