Parallels or Fusion

I wouldn't say parallels is inaccessible, exactly. If you use ocr you'll be fine once the vm is set up, and by that I mean just press one or 2, 3 buttons at the most with ocr, wait and you'll be good to go. Some of the settings you will need ocr if you want to access them like the table in keyboard shortcuts but other than that settings are accessible. with vmware fusion having the same caveat with arm windows. If you don't have an adaptor, you'll need to use ocr or ask for sighted help to get passed the first instalation phaze because no audio unless you have a adaptor; both have their, buts, if you will. Tbh fusion has gone downhill since broadcom's acquisition. I.e, bugs don't get fixed such as the, login items bug; it'll trigger practically every time you launch fusion, which if your sighted its not a big deal as you can just ignore it; but if you use voiceover... The, vmware fusion has added items that can run in the background. You can mannage this in system settings getting spoken by voiceover every time you launch fusion is, to be frank, annoying as all hell and drove me nuts, if I'm beeing honest. you cannot check for updates from the software itself, you have to do it manually whwhich is a headache given broadcom making it stupid hard to access their downloads etc. Now. Will parallels give you anything fusion doesn't have... Yes. You'll be able to access folders from the mac from the vm side. Fusion has this if using intel macs but since apple silicon that's no longer the case. Other than that though? Not really. I've personally noticed parallels be way quicker at things like starting vms, resuming and suspending than fusion but, that's not a big deal.
In the end it’s your choice, just be aware that both have their ups and downs. Given the dddirection fusion's going though? I'd say parallels might be the better alternative in my opinion. In any case parallels has a 14 day free trial, so you lose nothing by trying it if you want to do so you can have the most information before deciding. You've also got utm which, cant say much about that one as I haven't used it in a long time but its yet another one you can explore, if the above options, fusion or parallels don't meet your needs.

I'm not satisfied with either of the processes. It is better. Go ahead with one basic windows Laptop. It will serve your purpose.

Parallels is a bit of a pain to set up but once the work is done it works very well indeed. I did try installing fusion a while back but it seemed overly complicated and I gave up. Parallels is the one that has Microsoft's blessing too, if that counts for anything.

Obviously, the biggest thing about Parallels is that it is paid.

As with any of these things, we end up having to look for the 'as good as it gets' rather than the best. Each have compromises. If you do have the time, might be worth starting with fusion and if it serves your needs, you have it for free however, if you're finding it limitting, a Parallels trial might be worth a look.

I did do a guide on setting Parallels up which is floating around here somewhere. Once done it feels like you're on a windows machine, but it will take you a couple of hours to get all your ducks in a row.

Obviously it's your choice, but personally I love parallels. As a person with a powerful macbook, I got parallels for $75 a year.
Let's say a windows laptop lasts 5 years. I can't get a decent windows laptop for $375 that's gonna do what I need to do. I'd rather have parallels on my macbook and share resources.
I've not found fusion to meet my needs. I love all the coherence features haha.

I used Fusion for years, but this fall, an old bug reappeared, and when I did some research, it seemed that Fusion was no longer being updated. I switched to Parallels. It's not as accessible, but it's usable, and many things are possible with it on an Apple Silicon Mac that weren't with Fusion, such as true file sharing.