Parallels Desktop

16.0.1

16.0.1

See all Versions

so Parallels 16 (P16) and Fusion 12 (F12) are now released. Let's compare. F12 standard (now called Player) version cost; now free for personal use. P16 standard cost $79, even for students and home use. F12 Pro cost $149 one time, and that includes THREE licenses, cross-platform (licenses good on Fusion for Mac or Workstation for Windows or Linux). P16 Pro cost $99 PER YEAR, one license per computer. In other words, P16 has not changed its pricing structure with the new release. VmWare has significantly lowered TCO with latest release. Apple Silicon (AS) is coming; the expert consensus is that virtualizing (not to be confused with emulating) Windows, which is Intel based, will be basically impossible on AS based Macs. Emulation MAY be possible, but we don't know enough yet about performance, etc, to understand how it would work and how WELL, and if any 3rd party vendor care enough to put in the resources to even overcome the technical hurdles to build an Intel emulation product over AS. Is the market demand enough to warrant it? So, in other words, Vmware recognizes the run for Desktop virtualization is over in the next year or so, and is rewarding its user base by lowering cost to help ease them through a transition, at the same time keeping them up to date and running on the current Intel based Macs for as long as users want or keep their Intel Macs. Parallels has opted to continue to charge (milk) its users by NOT reducing cost of ownership, even knowing that this is an End of Life product scenario for Parallels Desktop as we know it. Understandable, because unlike Vmware, outside of Parallels Desktop Mac, they don't have other products or solutions advanced or established enough to offset the lost of revenue as need for P Desktop declines in the next few years. They have to milk the cow when it is the only cow you have, while they can. VMware has firmly established alternative technologies once Fusion for Desktop is gone (cloud based and application virtualization), they have a firmly established product line(s) and business in Enterprise. They can and will continue to support Workstation for Windows and Linux. Parallels has a steep hill to climb if tries to compete with VMware in the cloud and server based solutions for Enterprise, because it has to first establish a consistent MATURE technology solution on Intel hardware geared towards Enterprise and cloud and server based solutions. If you are personal, home user, F12 makes more sense right now than buying or upgrading to P16, considering that virtualizing Windows on Intel Macs will decline as Intel Macs grow old and are eventually replaced by AS based Macs; in fact if you are already using Fusion 11 and don't mind sticking with Mojave on your Intel Mac for another year or two, there's no reason to upgrade to F12 unless you need one of the new features (Direct X 11?). The money you would put down the drain for a new or continued SUBSCRIPTION to Parallels, OR to upgrade F11 to F12, you could apply towards a decent refurb Windows PC box and run Windows natively. It is ridiculously easy and affordable to buy quality refurb Windows boxes; I don't mean low end either, i7 cpus only 2 or 3 generations back. For most SMBs that are Mac shops but still need Windows application access, that is probably the solution for the future, get an inexpensive used Windows box, stick it in the corner and access on a network with Remote Desktop, Citrix or any of a dozen remote methods. That's my two cents, and I'm not a Parallels hater or Vmware shill; in the last 20 years I've used and recommended both; personally, to co-workers and to clients, to the tune of thousands of dollars in licenses.

so Parallels 16 (P16) and Fusion 12 (F12) are now released. Let's compare. F12 standard (now called Player) version cost; now free for personal use. P16 standard cost $79, even for students and home use. F12 Pro cost $149 one time, and that includes THREE licenses, cross-platform (licenses good on Fusion for Mac or Workstation for Windows or Linux). P16 Pro cost $99 PER YEAR, one license per computer. In other words, P16 has not changed its pricing structure with the new release. VmWare has significantly lowered TCO with latest release. Apple Silicon (AS) is coming; the expert consensus is that virtualizing (not to be confused with emulating) Windows, which is Intel based, will be basically impossible on AS based Macs. Emulation MAY be possible, but we don't know enough yet about performance, etc, to understand how it would work and how WELL, and if any 3rd party vendor care enough to put in the resources to even overcome the technical hurdles to build an Intel emulation product over AS. Is the market demand enough to warrant it? So, in other words, Vmware recognizes the run for Desktop virtualization is over in the next year or so, and is rewarding its user base by lowering cost to help ease them through a transition, at the same time keeping them up to date and running on the current Intel based Macs for as long as users want or keep their Intel Macs. Parallels has opted to continue to charge (milk) its users by reducing cost of ownership, even knowing that this is an End of Life product scenario for Parallels Desktop as we know it. Understandable, because unlike Vmware, outside of Parallels Desktop Mac, they don't have other products or solutions advanced or established enough to offset the lost of revenue as need for P Desktop declines in the next the next few years. They have to milk the cow when it is the only cow you have, while they can. VMware has firmly established alternative technologies once Fusion for Desktop is gone (cloud based and application virtualization), they have a firmly established product line(s) and business in Enterprise. They can and will continue to support Workstation for Windows and Linux. Parallels has a steep hill to climb if tries to compete with VMware in the cloud and server based solutions for Enterprise, because it has to first establish a consistent MATURE technology solution on Intel hardware geared towards Enterprise and cloud and server based solutions. If you are personal, home user, F12 makes more sense right now than buying or upgrading to P16, considering that virtualizing Windows on Intel Macs will decline as Intel Macs grow old and are eventually replaced by AS based Macs; in fact if you are already using Fusion 11 and don't mind sticking with Mojave on your Intel Mac for another year or two, there's no reason to upgrade to F12 unless you need one of the new features (Direct X 11?). The money you would put down the drain for a new or continued SUBSCRIPTION to Parallels, OR to upgrade F11 to F12, you could apply towards a decent refurb Windows PC box and run Windows natively. It is ridiculously easy and affordable to buy quality refurb Windows boxes; I don't mean low end either, i7 cpus only 2 or 3 generations back. For most SMBs that are Mac shops but still need Windows application access, that is probably the solution for the future, get an inexpensive used Windows box, stick it in the corner and access on a network with Remote Desktop, Citrix or any of a dozen remote methods. That's my two cents, and I'm not a Parallels hater or Vmware shill; in the last 20 years I've used and recommended both, personal and to clients, to the tune of thousands of dollars in licenses.

I deleted my previous review because I found a work-around to the vexing only-one-resolution-in-Catalina problem in Parallels 15. The work-around is to copy the Parallels Tools ISO (Applications>Parallels Desktop>Show Package Contents>Resources>Tools>prl-tools-mac.iso). Copy the ISO to the desktop of your Catalina VM. You might not be able to see ANY shared folders or be able to drag and drop (because there are no tools installed, duh). I logged on to my host via the network and copied the ISO to the root of the hard drive in my host, then I could see it inside the Catalina VM. Open the ISO, install Parallels Tools, reboot, and you should now have multiple resolutions available (in addition to all the other functionality that Tools provides). Nowhere that I could find is this mention ANYWHERE on the Parallels support site (though it will be shortly). For this glaring oversight on behalf of Parallels, I rate this version low.

bought when the version 8 was released and now i can't use the code to activate the sw.

A comment of annoyance: If you check out the release notes for WINE v4.0 you'll find:
"What's new in Wine 4.0. . . . Initial support for Direct3D 12 is implemented. Direct3D 12 support requires the vkd3d library, and a Vulkan-capable graphics card."

Meanwhile, we've been making requests to Parallels, VMWare and Oracle for YEARS to implement DirectX 11 and 12 capability, with no likelihood of it ever happening. And yet, the WINE project figured out how to do it. Explain that to me. ?

Guys, The following article sheds light on why Virtualization systems have not been able to solve the Direct X 11 and higher problem. https://www.parallels.com/blogs/directx-and-parallels-desktop-13/ Now Apple has made no secret that it is deprecating support for OpenGL, that Metal is the future. But Metal would seem NOT to have the necessary APIs or mapping to solve the problem either, as Metal 1.0 has been around since 2014 and Metal 2.0 since mid-2017, plenty of time for Fusion, Parallels, etc, to figure out Direct X 11+ support, ASSUMING Metal 2.0 was capable of solving the issues. So, it would seem Metal 2.0 is still lacking something. I'm not a graphics expert, but my understanding is that Vulkan is possibly the answer to a lot of these cross platform graphics support issues. Metal and DX sitting on top of Vulkan would provide a bridge, across multiple OS platforms; the graphics version of the 'write once, run anywhere' idea.

If you're wondering, Parallels Desktop 13.3.2 works fine in Mojave. You don't need to pay for an upgrade at this time if you don't want to. Both Parallels and VMWare Fusion are constantly bugging us for an upgrade even when the current version works OK.

With the 13.1 update all my Windows 10 VMs stall (hang) on boot and the Parallels application in the Application folder is invisible. Unusable. I had to revert to Parallels 13.0.1.

Parallels does no longer support Apple Bootcamp (since Parallels 13) sorry without that function this Software is nearly worthless to me!!!!

I have purchased Parallels Desktop 12.x on June 22, 2017. I contacted Parallels Customer support yesterday after having received an email announcing the availability of version 13. Since I had just purchased, I thought they would help me out to get version 13 with paying the full price again. I was WRONG to trust them. They said that only people who've purchased on August 1st and later will get upgraded free of charge. The rest of their customers must pay again no matter what. Word of advice, buy VMware. They have been there forever. Parallels are just a greedy bunch who don't care about loyal customers even if you've been purchasing their software since their early years. Once again, stay far from Parallels!

FYI for version 11 users. Parallels just updated to v11.2.3. It is a compatibility fix for running the latest Windows 10 update on macOS 10.12.x.

Breaks my heart, but 12.x is less problematic than VMware 8.5.x has been. Having said that, I've had to completely uninstall and reinstall Parallels after the 10.12.4 update for some reason due to an odd startup delay issue, but overall it has been a lot more functional overall with some of the bugs that seem to be creeping into VMware after the enormous layoff...

If you feel enought paying 80$US every year to paralles (to 1 mac, i have 2 macs) you can try other option: cost looks like same 80$US but it's not yearly fee, and it's not per mac, you can use on multiple mac. Or can try free one virtualbox or Veertu desktop (free too) but no Mac OS guest yet

Caution!!! I'm a long time user and tried going to 12 but had to quickly revert to 11. I'm sure it will get resolved in a while but at the moment v12 is unusably buggy in many ways. Go read the Parallels forums and you'll get an idea. Fiver starts when it's good but right now... not usable for V12

It's expensive crap. No apology for language - that's 100% truth. I've nothing to apologize for. Parallels is expensive crap. Every OSX they're releasing SW, which differs only in one parameter: "allowed-version-osx". No way Parallels there is replacement and I am happily using it!
If you'd provide your piece of SW for reasonable price - I'd maybe consider. But you f* with me once I nought in past & you're simply pricey - for NO additional value - maybe some poor other users need to use your solution, but if they'd try to search a bit - you're gonna die by hunger!
That half star as rating is more than generous. And yes, you're too greedy.

So when I criticized MacUpdate for this update to Parallels being f ive weeks late in being posted here they deleted my post within a coupe of hours. Says a lot about them... Wonder how soon this will be removed...

I got an email from MacUpdate that goes like this:

......We've partnered with MacUpdate Community favorite Parallels to offer you 2 exclusive discounts:
Parallels Desktop 11 for only $59.99 - 25% off the normal price of $79.99......

Parallels Desktop 11 is ideal for home and student use, and of course, this PERPETUAL license of Parallels allows you to run Windows and Mac applications side by side......

What is the meaning of the word 'Perpetual'. Does this means there is no need to fork out for future upgrades ever? Or is this a misprint?

So, in addition to my work laptop, I go to install Parallels on my home machine (something previously allowable given that nobody has figured out how to be in two places at the same time yet). The installation process first deletes the old version, and after you enter your license number it reports back to say it's already in use on a different computer and you're prompted to cough up another $50 or bail out and spend the time finding your old version and reinstalling that all over again. I was in a hurry preparing for something and I just had to bite the bullet and buy another (my very last) copy. I despise this company. The software they have may be good, but I'm certain their CEO is both an analyst and a therapist!

Just as I was getting used to Parallells, this crazy they come up with this new licensing s**t. I can't afford it. So I am forced to look for a better option. Not wise, Parallells. Good bye!

So I've been playing with PD 11 and Fusion 8 for the last month now (i've been a long time user of both products for many years, and use both professionally and personally). I have a number of Macs running multiple boot partitions from Mavericks, to Yosemite and El Capitan. My observations (your mileage may vary, this is just me) is that on older hardware, PD 11 is slower than PD 10 on the same setup, where as Fusion 8 is faster than Fusion 7 on the same older hardware (old in this case is Core2 Duo macs, not Macs with i series CPUs). On newer hardware (i5's and i7's), I don't notice a difference between Fusion 8 and PD 11 (I don't use for gaming, so not commenting on graphics, just business apps performance). From a licensing perspective, it's getting harder to justify to myself, personally and professionally, to stick with PD, which is one license, one CPU, whereas Fusion is one license/three CPUs. That plus VM compatibility with VMWare Workstation for Windows, I have to give the nod to Fusion. Note this is coming from someone who has used PD primarily for his personally work the last several years, mainly just out of laziness and not wanting to spend time migrating all my VMs fusion. But now I'm switching over (for personal stuff, professionally, still using both, as clients and co-workers have a vested interest in sticking with what they have).

For those concerned (IE gamers): Parallels 11 does NOT (again) support DirectX 11.

*sigh* This has been an issue for years, since DirectX 11 was released. At least Parallels now says they are 'going' to support DirectX11 in Parallels Desktop 11. They suggest signing up and watching their email list for notification of when they finally catch up. I'm waiting on updating to version 11 until they, at last, get this together.

BTW: VMware lags even further behind with DirectX support. They JUST started supporting DirectX 10, which Parallels started supporting back in Parallels 10. There is no sign of VMware supporting DirectX 11. Sheesh!

Take a look on our desktop service, available foc Macs and other OS: https://www.apponfly.com/en?KAI

For those considering switching over to Fusion, and have Windows 7 images, note that Fusion does not support USB 3.0 with Windows 7 VMs.. this is true of the VMWare Workstation for Windows product as well (no support for USB 3 in virtualized Windows 7 images). Windows 8 and higher, no issues. There was no built in USB 3 drivers in Windows 7. Parallels found a way around that; and wrote virtualized drivers. VMWare has taken the high road and taken the position if USB 3 isn't supported in Windows 7 (ie NATIVE OS DRIVERS, not talking about 3rd party add on drivers from device makers, OEM's, motherboard makers, etc), then it's not supported in VWWare.

Bottom line, do your research. Grass is not necessarily greener on the other side. For the record, I use Fusion and Parallels, so I feel I'm rather unbiased. From a feature/ functionality perspective, I find Fusion MUCH better at OS X virtualization, and Parallels better at Windows virtualization, mainly speeed, but just marginally. YMMV.

From a licensing perspective, i had no issues with PD through version 10, but the new PD 11 user license does have me thinking if the slightly faster speed of running Windows over Fusion is worth all the new limitations in the PD 11 user license.

Although I've been a loyal Parallels customer since version 5 and find the software actually quite good, I can no longer recommend it. Why? Starting with version 11, Parallels is enforcing the single-seat license in their EULA. Whereas I was always able to activate my office computer + my laptop on a single license, I will now have to pay 100% more for my upgrade to Parallels 11 Pro. There is no option for reduced-price extra seats for the Pro version. These abhorrent and customer-hostile license terms are so restrictive, and the lack of any understanding or flexibility on the part of their support team, mean that I have begun the process of moving everything over to VMWare, with excellent performance, unlimited multi-seat licenses for individuals and a crossgrade offer for Parallels customers. I'll vote with my wallet, and with this well-deserve half-star for a product-destroying licensing policy. Goodbye Parallels.

Just bought version 10 and received it about two months ago, and now there's a $50 upgrade. Not at all impressed. A while ago, VMware offered a sidegrade for users of Parallels Desktop to get the latest version of Fusion for about ten bucks; hopefully they'll offer something similar in the future. After having versions 4, 6, and 7 (and having them all stop working on me after a few OS X updates), I'm done with Parallels.

Besides my feelings about Parallels' business practices, the fact is that the cost of Parallels plus a license of Windows 10 now costs as much as just buying an HP Stream (or a similar competing product). I know these low-end netbooks aren't as powerful as your Mac, but they also allow you to run Windows without affecting your Mac in any way or using any of its resources, plus they are quite portable. If you find a good enough sale, you can buy Windows-running hardware for less than the cost of Windows-running software.

Seems like only yesterday I finished pulling out my wallet for a YAPU (Yet Another Parallels Upgrade) and now I see Parallels 11 is out and it's another fifty bucks to upgrade. This reminds me of the origin of the expression "daylight robbery" where property taxes were assessed by the number of windows a house had. Parallels (to me) has really just become a Windows tax :-/.

Parallels drives me crazy. On the one hand, it is stable, feature rich, and fast. On the other hand, its licensing as absolutely abhorrent. Basically a forced $40 upgrade every year. While previous versions do tend to continue to work on newer OS (v.9 does work on Yosemite, etc.), when a problem arises Parallels basically tells you you need to pay to upgrade for the latest OS support. Add to the fact that it's nearly impossible to deactivate a computer once activate (installed Parallels on a MacBook Air, activated, a few months later sold the Air and bought a Pro, couldn't get Parallels to activate since it claimed the code was already in use - took days with Parallels support to get the issue resolved), the licensing system is just terrible. With that being said, Parallels is the only VM software for Macs that supports USB 3.0 on Windows 7 (or Server 2008) - and this is an invaluable feature. For some asinine reason, VMWare refuses to create USB 3.0 drivers for Windows 7, essentially forcing me to keep using Parallels for my VM needs. Now that Windows 10 is out, and it seems to not completely suck, I am hopeful that I can now ditch Parallels and it's absurd licensing practices for a more sane company in VMWare (well, licensing sane, lack of USB 3 support is pretty insane...)

Ai! Will NOT allow the update to Windows 10! The Parallels video driver is not signed so Windows 10 refuses to install/update today. See also: http://kb.parallels.com/en/123053 This is known for 2 months still not solved at final release date for Windows 10...

MacUpdate, this is up to version 10.2.1 (10.2.1.29006) now

BEWARE updating to 10.2.0 -> DON'T DO IT!!! Stick with the previous version until Parallels get their act together. Using the update feature in Parallels 10, I updated to 10.2.0 and all hell broke loose. I ended up with a barely working, messed up Windows XP Pro. Among the problems inflicted by this poorly planned update: 1) Windows freaked out that Parallels Tools had installed a bad disk driver. 2) This caused the Parallels Tools installation to FAIL. 3) Upon forced reboot, the Windows XP display settings were ruined. Windows warned me of the problem and tried to help me get a better picture. I tried and found the desktop image resolution was still awful. 4) Then Window freaked again, telling me: "A problem occurred during hardware installation. Your new hardware might not work properly." And it didn't. So I wrote Parallels support in detail about the mess they had inflicted. They never wrote back to me. Gee thanks! I wrote to them further about my solution, which was to: 1) Manually download the full installer for 10.2.0. 2) Run the installer. 3) Watch the Parallels Tools installer mess up AGAIN. 4) Reboot Windows XP and run Parallels Tools installer a SECOND time. 5) Manually adjust the ruined display settings. This time the resolution problem cleared up and all looks fine. For putting me through this abysmal update and wasting my time, Parallels earns 2 stars in this review. Well earned. VMWare is calling...

Parallels Desktop 10 Upgrade: Dream Exchange (or Fraud/Ripp off ???) In US$ = 49.99 In Euro = 68.50 In CHF = 66.99 Actual Exchange is 1 CHF = US$ 0.9730 / Euro 1.0732

Just learned some interesting trivia and computing history. Those old enough, you remember IBM OS/2 operating system from the late 80's to mid 90's? OS/2 was meant to replace DOS, and jointly developed by IBM and Microsoft. It was supposed to be Windows before Windows existed. Microsoft got tired of waiting on IBM, in the meantime they came out with Windows 3 which was supposed to be a stop gap until OS/2 with a GUI was ready. But Windows 3 sold like crazy MS continued developing Windows. Windows 3.1 and 95 were hugely successful and the rest is history. Meanwhile OS/2 was deployed heavily in the banking and financial sector, because they ran big IBM mainframes. Many ATM machines ran OS/2 because it was (for its time) very stable, capable of 24/7 operation, compared to DOS and Windows 3.x. When IBM stopped development of OS/2, companies heavily invested in it either migrated to Windows NT / XP or tried to limp along. A bank in Moscow which used OS/2 heavily, hired a group of developers (Russian) to solve their OS/2 problem and find ways to keep OS/2 running on the newer and newer hardware coming out. The developers determined the best solution was not to try to continue development of OS/2 but find a way to run OS/2 virtualized. That product became Parallels Workstation and that company became Parallels. With their knowledge and experience gained of how to virtualize Intel x86 hardware, the company saw a market opportunity with the Mac, to run Windows and PC software. And viola, Parallels Desktop for Mac was born. The irony is so wonderful and sweet!!! Microsoft told IBM to bug off and jumped ship on OS/2. But OS/2 wouldn't die, and people trying to continue using OS/2 spawned the birth of Parallels, which now allows Mac users (hardware made by Apple, Microsoft's main competitor) to run their competitors flagship product Microsoft Windows, without having to buy additional x86 PC hardware. And where did the x86 PC hardware start? With the IBM PC!! OMG! The absolute twisted-ness of this story is precious. Add to that the fact that it took the Russians to develop it, just to keep running IBM OS/2 on a PC, which--extra irony-- IBM no longer makes PCs anyways, because they sold their PC division to guess who? A Chinese company, Lenovo. So the story starts back at a time when the Russians and Chinese were our adversaries, and ends up today where we owe one country for developing Parallels to let us run Windows on Macs, and the other we buy PCs from by the hundred of thousands that bought the PC division from the company that started it all in the first place. Gotta love it!! And yes, you can run OS/2 in Parallels, I've done it (supposedly you can also run OS/2 in VFusion and VirtualBox, but I've never tried it).

It's hard to review something that runs Windows fairly as it is, after all, Windows. That anything should do such a good job of running Windows in emulation is amazing. I have to set up a lot of DSP hardware using device-specific Windows applications and Parallels has no problem communicating with any of the external hardware I've come across, whether it be a serial or network connection. Superb. Ten stars if it could run Windows without actually having to run Windows! Sigh.

What a bunch of cr*p. For two afternoons I've tried to find a way to request the FREE UPDAGE from 9 to 10 as I have recently purchased 9. All I can find is the $49.99 paid upgrade. I believe if they really have a commitment to a free upgrade path that option should be on the same url as the paid upgrade. Arrrrgggg.

For years now I have not be able to create or resize a disk to larger than 64GB. Website says this is a know problem with GUID partitions, which all modern Macs use. I am very unhappy with this lack of support and am ready to switch back to Fusion because of this. Very frustrating.

Everyone's so cheesed off about the price that it's hard to find a product review. I think in 10.8 Parallels was more stable and responsive, and in 10.9 it was VMWare Fusion. Anyone tried both the new Parallels and VMWare Fusisons in 10.10? Any recommendations?

Hey all, Got a couple questions. I keep tabs on what people are saying about virtualization software for the mac. I was curious about paralells at this point. I have for the most part been a vmware fusion, and virtualbox user. When i tried paralells as a trial a couple years back, i found things that I found made it not suitable for me. for example, when I tried it, it didn't play nice with mac os x accessibility unless paralles tools were installed, cohearence or unity mode didn't work with anything but windows. some other operating systems such as linux didn't work well at the time. Also I like having cross platform compatible products and virtualbox and vmware both meet those requirements. vb and VF also dont conflect with zoom when on like PD did. With all this said my main reason for a VM would be for Linux or older versions of os x. When it comes to windows, most of my needs would be met with wine, or an xp VM because it's mostly a bridge for me for the unique time when an app won't run on the mac, or i need windows to bridge a format gap so it can be converted to something the mac understands. Those needs have gone down though. I would say the most critical need i've had for windows lately was to run a bios flasher for the HP desktop or firmware that doesn't have a dos or linux, or os x flasher. With all the above said is going to offer me anything my other two solutions arent ? The only thing mac related that might be worth it is if Quartz extreme works in a VM, i know by nature, that tends to only work as host on a mac. I've watched a few videos on youtube, and i've come to the conclusion people aren't happy with the PD company and i wouldn't gain anything, but i still thought i'd ask for some feedback. Thanks :)

I used Parallels 10 to import my son's college PC into his Mac. The Parallels Transporter software started out really fast (had turned off WiFi and there was just a gigabit ethernet cable between the two machines), and then it got slower and slower and eventually it slowed to crawl and the whole process too over 15 hours. Awful. BTW - my son's Mac had over 100GB free space to start with. Then, when it was all finally done, after he logged into his virtual machine he had a black desktop background and all the desktop icons were those of his Mac desktop - NOT the desktop picture and icons he had on his PC. Why on earth wouldn't you just end up with something that looked EXACTLY like his PC setup?? Now we have to get figure all that out... Seriously, how do you get that wrong at version 10! What a piece of crud...

Not again! I paid for 4,5,6,7,8,9, the update price is unbelievable! Every major version of OS X updates comes with the expensive update of PD. Is it really worth that much for an update?