Professional Web Applications Themes

Virtual PC on OSX - Mac Applications & Software

I understand that the first version of VPC to run native on OSX was conidered quite slow. How is the current version as far as speed?...

  1. #1

    Default Virtual PC on OSX

    I understand that the first version of VPC to run native on OSX was
    conidered quite slow. How is the current version as far as speed?
    Daniel Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    >I understand that the first version of VPC to run native on OSX was 
     

    That assertion is logicially correct. I have heard rumor that the new version
    is a tidy bit faster. Hope that helps...
    Greenmamba9999 Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    In article <tc.umn.edu>, Daniel
    L. Snyder wrote: 

    It would still have to be called 'quite slow', though 6.0 was better
    than 5. It remains pretty painful on a Quicksilver 867 with 1GB of
    ram, even with half the ram given over to Windows. I'm running
    Windows2000. I'm told XP is even worse, while NT is supposedly a
    little snappier. The latest VPC update, 6.1, is flakier than any of
    the previous releases I've tried. This is the first update from
    Microsoft.

    I was using VPC at work because I have to do cross-platform software
    development, but as of 6.1 I'm giving up. If my company wants me to
    verify that my code builds and runs in Windows, they'll have to buy me
    a second machine that can run it native. Depending on what you need
    Windows for, you might want to consider the same approach. You're
    buying a license from Microsoft either way...

    If you have fast net access to another Windows box, you might also
    consider running vnc to access it from osx. This will definitely be
    much more tolerable than emulation.







    tristero Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 7:30:40 -0400, tristero wrote
    (in message <Aph9b.262914$ops.asp.att.net>):
     

    My understanding is that all the update from Microsoft does is change the
    product information, that nothing has changed in the code itself.

    -- James L. Ryan -- TaliesinSoft

    James Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    In article <east.earthlink.net>,
    James L. Ryan <com> wrote:
     
    >
    > My understanding is that all the update from Microsoft does is change the
    > product information, that nothing has changed in the code itself.[/ref]

    I think a friend said that the program does registration differently.

    Meow
    Cat Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    In article <east.earthlink.net>, James L Ryan wrote: 
    >
    > My understanding is that all the update from Microsoft does is change the
    > product information, that nothing has changed in the code itself.[/ref]

    <shrug> I didn't pay any real attention to what the updater said it
    was changing, although I do remember a fairly long list. And it's
    pretty big: 15MB. Even by MS standards that's a lot if nothing of
    substance was modified. So I don't think your understanding is
    correct, but I can't say for sure. And I don't think it matters, to
    be honest.

    Maybe it's just a coincidence that VPC started hanging immediately
    after I installed 6.1, something it had never done with 5.x, 6.0 or
    6.01 (I never ran 6.02). Stranger things have happened in the
    wonderful world of Windows, and I did recently install a Windows
    security update. Or maybe 6.1, or for that matter 6.02, was to blame.
    Either way, as a user of VPC for quite some time, my recommendation is
    unchanged: avoid it if you possibly can.

    If cirstances force you to use Windows for one reason or another,
    you're _much_ better of buying a cheap intel box for that purpose.
    It's not even a close call imo.








    tristero Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX


    "tristero" <net> wrote in message
    news:o3i9b.464067$.. 

    I'd agree with this, even thought I run and use Virtual PC. I use it for
    laptop use, where acess to a Windows box may not be possible.

    On the other hand. Virtual PC for Windows is pretty good - the way I do
    things is to have several virtual machines running on a PC, and then remote
    desktop or ssh/vnc (Linux) to them from the Mac.


    Cheers,
    Ian


    Ian Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    In article <east.earthlink.net>,
    James L. Ryan <com> wrote:
     
    >
    > My understanding is that all the update from Microsoft does is change the
    > product information, that nothing has changed in the code itself.[/ref]

    Maybe, maybe not, but I am now finally able to use USB devices on 6.1.
    On previous versions (well I tried from 5.0 up) I couldn't get anything
    to be seen by Windows at all.

    Rob..
    Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    In article <bUl9b.329$server.ntli.net>, Ian
    McCall wrote: 
    >
    > I'd agree with this, even thought I run and use Virtual PC. I use it for
    > laptop use, where acess to a Windows box may not be possible.[/ref]


    Right, this was the one exception I had in mind. In this case you're
    pretty well stuck with full emulation.

    Since I don't require portability, my solution now is to have two
    separate boxes sharing a monitor (my monitor has two inputs), a usb
    keyboard/mouse (cheap usb switch) and a network (cheap hub). I can't
    begin to tell you how much more effective this is than VPC, it's not
    that much more expensive and it's almost as convenient.

    Not that I'm knocking the designers of VPC. They did a very
    impressive job making it work as well as it does. But emulation at
    this level just doesn't cut it.

     

    Makes sense, since it's running on an intel processor already and is
    therefore presumably not doing hardware emulation. This gives you the
    nice design of VPC without the worst part of the overhead. I've never
    seen VPC running in this mode, but it should be at least as good as,
    say, VMWare for intel-Linux or MacOnLinux for for ppc-linux.






    tristero Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    In article <Aph9b.262914$ops.asp.att.net>, tristero
    <net> wrote:
     
    > If you have fast net access to another Windows box, you might also
    > consider running vnc to access it from osx. This will definitely be
    > much more tolerable than emulation.
    >[/ref]

    What is VNC? I'm interested as this might solve my dilemma, too. I'm
    planning on getting a new G5 at work, but Virtual PC will not run on
    the G5s (there's a knowledge-base article on M$'s website about how
    their next version--7, presumably--will fix this).

    I might be able to use this VNC thing, though. Any details appreciated!

    thanks,
    _dennis
    Carvin' Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    In article <180920031044495603%com>, Carvin' Dunes wrote: 
    >> If you have fast net access to another Windows box, you might also
    >> consider running vnc to access it from osx. This will definitely be
    >> much more tolerable than emulation.
    >>[/ref]
    >
    > What is VNC?[/ref]

    It stands for Virtual Network Computing, which is pretty hopelessly
    generic. What VNC provides, at least in my uses of it, is a way to
    access the screen of one computer from another computer. In other
    words, you can sit at your Mac and interact with a remote Windows (or
    OSX or X11) screen running elsewhere.

    In this particular case, Windows would be running native on an intel
    box, so it wouldn't have to go through emulation is it does with
    VirtualPC. But the gui would show up as a window on your OSX screen,
    just as it does with VPC.

    As you might guess, the win with VNC vis-a-vis VPC is that execution
    is much faster. The price is that the gui is a bit slower, since
    it's running over a network.

    If you want both faster processing and a fast gui, you might want to
    consider simply having the two machines share a monitor, mouse and
    keyboard. This is what I'm doing now and it's very nice. The major
    requirement for this is a monitor that can accept and switch between
    multiple inputs.




    tristero Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Virtual PC on OSX

    tristero <net> wrote:
     

    I'm not sure that's my experience. When I use vnc I use it between a
    G4/867 with 640 M RAM and a Compaq Armada laptop with 450 MHz and 128 M
    RAM and a 100 Mb/s ethernet card. The two computers are placed in two
    different rooms, and are connected through two 10/100 Mb/s switches.

    It even "feels" as if Windows through vnc runs faster on my G4 than
    directly on the Compaq.
    --
    Per Erik Rønne
    Per Guest

Similar Threads

  1. How to get virtual dir name ?
    By F C in forum ASP Components
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 16th, 03:07 PM
  2. virtual pc
    By Rizdguy webforumsuser@macromedia.com in forum Macromedia Director Basics
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: June 21st, 06:16 PM
  3. Virtual
    By Kevin Wheeler in forum Windows Server
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 7th, 01:50 PM
  4. virtual nic
    By Jerry in forum Sun Solaris
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 4th, 02:12 PM
  5. Virtual PC 6
    By Tom in forum Mac Applications & Software
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: August 2nd, 09:21 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139