 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Applications / Virtual PC / September 2005Guest PC
Anyone hear about this? Just saw the press release and was wondering how it compares with VPC 7. I find VPC 7 (iMac G5 1.8GHz, 2 GB RAM, OSX 10.3.7) to be a real dog--it functions with MS Project, but not really well. Ken Gorelick Ken, hear about what? As to your other comment, I can't disagree: I'm running VPC7.0.1 (PMac G5 1.8GHz, 1.5GB RAM, OSX 10.3.7) also, and it has been excruciatingly slow. All I'm running on it is Internet Explorer, viewing Web pages off my own hard drive. I've been posting on this site, and yesterday, spoke again (2 hours!) with a Microsoft technician about it, but not sure much was accomplished. We did manage to get it back into the world of the living--it had slowed so much as to be unusable--but after updating VPC7 to 7.0.1 (update designed to make compatible with G5, apparently), it was only slightly faster than it had been the day before, and the jury's still out on whether it will stay that way. If you figure out how to make it run even reasonably fast, at least one of us would be very interested in knowing about it. The what is the program called "Guest PC" in the subject line. I saw where someone else posted the press release. The company's website is very coy about the program's functionality. The 7.01 update served the sole purpose (as far as I know) of enabling VPC to work with Macs that have >2GB RAM. I have turned off every puff feature I can identify in WinXP. All I can say is that VPC 7 runs faster on my G5 than VPC 6.1.1 did on my G4. That was completely unusable (running Win98). Ken On 2/1/05 7:33 PM, in article 1107304380.800566.117230@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, "jac" <jcoronat@paulbunyan.net> wrote: > Ken, hear about what? > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > If you figure out how to make it run even reasonably fast, at least one > of us would be very interested in knowing about it. Ken Gorelick Hi Kenneth: Yeah. My experience is that VPC 7 is slower on my G4 than VPC 6 was, but not by much. On the other hand, it has some features that make it nicer to use. The only reports I have heard about Guest PC suggest that it is even slower than VPC 7, by quite a long way. We're still waiting for someone else to buy a copy and try it :-) I am forced to run Windows XP by the applications I need to run (Office 2003 requires Windows XP). Even if I wasn't, I would probably persist with it, because I know it well and that's what I am running on the PC as well. However, as has been mentioned here many times, Windows 98 and Windows 95 were DESIGNED for slower machines with less memory. They will indeed run a lot faster in VPC 7. And they are cheaper. The downside is that Microsoft no longer supports either product officially. And it is really difficult to keep those operating systems safe from Internet Nasties: they were never designed to be as secure as Windows XP, and they're not! Microsoft has not provided the fixes in Service Pack 2 for Windows XP to those operating systems. So if I were going to run one, I would install it, then immediately back it up BEFORE I connected it to the Internet. That way, each time you get taken out by an exploit or virus, you throw away your virtual machine, duplicate the backup, and carry on. To do this, you have to discipline yourself never to save anything to the PC's "Drive". Save everything to the Mac drive instead (right-click your My Documents folder and change it to a folder on the Mac hard disk.) Cheers On 2/2/05 2:15 PM, in article BE25B01B.761A%pulmon@comcast.net, "Kenneth Gorelick" <pulmon@comcast.net> wrote: > The what is the program called "Guest PC" in the subject line. I saw where > someone else posted the press release. The company's website is very coy [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Ken Gorelick  SignaturePlease reply to the newsgroup to maintain the thread. Please do not email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie <john@mcghie.name> Consultant Technical Writer Sydney, Australia +61 4 1209 1410 > The only reports I have heard about Guest PC suggest that it is even slower > than VPC 7, by quite a long way. The reports I read are hard to judge. Some say Guest PC compare quite well to VPC and QEMU. But I also heard people say that iEmulator (which just seems to be a frontend to QEMU) is faster than VPC, when QEMU is about 5 times slower than VPC7 on my G5. > However, as has been mentioned here many times, Windows 98 and Windows 95 > were DESIGNED for slower machines with less memory. They will indeed run a > lot faster in VPC 7. And they are cheaper. I had my best results with 98lite, ie. Internet Explorer stripped from Windows 98 and the Windows 95 Explorer added instead. That way you have the much better graphics and sound drivers of 98 with the less bloated GUI of 95. > The downside is that Microsoft no longer supports either product officially. My only fear is that the VM Extionsions might not work in the future, but apart from that I couldn't care less. > And it is really difficult to keep those operating systems safe from > Internet Nasties: they were never designed to be as secure as Windows XP, > and they're not! Microsoft has not provided the fixes in Service Pack 2 for > Windows XP to those operating systems. I have to disagree. If I'm not totally mistaken, the biggest problems at the moment are worms exploiting services like RPC and LASS, as well as email worms. No operating system can protect against the latter ones if they user is stupid enough to execute a worm attachment. Sure, there are virus scanners, but those had to be updated once in a while and even then the scanners simply cannot know the newest worms. Unfortunately repeating reports of spreading email worms still prove that there enough people who haven't learnt not to click every attachement without thinking. As for the services, well those were added in WinNT, ie. Win9x just cannot be attacked by such worms, which essentially means that Win9x is actually more secure against such malware than any more modern Windows. One might also add spyware to that list, but that problem can be confined to a certain degree by using a browser like Firefox instead of Internet Explorer. But Windows is hardly most secure operating system anyway and shouldn't be used without a real firewall - not a personal one! With VPC the best option is to disable networking unless you have applactions that have to access the internet for some reason. Simple downloads can also be made in OSX to the shared directory. In my case the only VM with networking enabled is the one running BeOS R5, and I doubt anyone will be targeting that one. > So if I were going to run one, I would install it, then immediately back it > up BEFORE I connected it to the Internet. That way, each time you get taken > out by an exploit or virus, you throw away your virtual machine, duplicate > the backup, and carry on. Wouldn't it be easier to enable the undo function? SignatureM.I.K.e Guest PC is much slower than VPC 7 (I'm running Windows XP Pro), but Guest PC only costs 39.95 and runs some programs that crash on VP 7 (primarily Indigo Rose's Setup Factory which is the main reason I need a PC). Sy On 2/6/05 5:30 AM, in article 36mkg2F54n6imU1@individual.net, "Michael Koenig" <mikenospam@email.de> wrote: >> The only reports I have heard about Guest PC suggest that it is even slower >> than VPC 7, by quite a long way. [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > Wouldn't it be easier to enable the undo function? My own experience with guest pc is mixed. Although it runs the DO based windows(95,98) well, it couldn't be any slower in running XP. Virtual PC runs XP but does not run 95 for some reason. Neither run extremley fast on my eMac 1.25GHZ, 1.5GB RAM. Now that I have broke down(literally) and bought a Compq laptop I have no need to run neithe VPC or Guest PC. (I need the Compaq for my windows XP class, virtual machines runnin within virtual machines just dosent quite work). Off Topic- can an direct me to a thread on putting Mac OS X86 on VMWare -- BongoBob8 macosx.com - The Answer to Mac Support - http://www.macosx.co Actually, Virtual PC 7.0.2 *can* run Windows 95, but it does not support installing that OS version on your virtual machine. Also, certain statistics are not avaiable on virtual machines running Windows 95. To get Virtual PC to run Windows 95, you'll have to use a version of Virtual PC that supports Windows 95 to make a hard disk image, then move that to a Virtual PC 7 installation and perform a virtual machine conversion. I am running such a system now... but I don't know how long this configuration is going to last! The version of VPC I used to make the Windows 95 installation is 3.0.1. If you have Windows 98 handy... install that (because it has USB support). > My own experience with guest pc is mixed. Although it runs the DOS > based windows(95,98) well, it couldn't be any slower in running XP. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > within virtual machines just dosent quite work). Off Topic- can any > direct me to a thread on putting Mac OS X86 on VMWare? Nope. Ethical reasons aside, I reckon you'd be in for a hard time making the Mac OS X-86 version work because of the fact that none of today's Macintosh applications are going to work on it (Rosetta has limited support for many of today's PowerPC-based apps). -- -- tonza I've installed Windows 95 under VPC 7.0 - I believe in this case "unsupported" means "we won't support you", not "It doesn't work." I've installed Windows 95 under VPC 7.0 - I believe in this case "unsupported" means "we won't support you", not "It doesn't work." Also, bringing an earlier install of 95 over to VPC 7.0 is a nightmare because of the BIOS change... when I tried that, I got into a place where a CD was required to re-install the CD driver... I'm sure you can figure out the problem with that. I agree. It's much simpler to create the VM in VPC7 rather than doing it in an earlier version and then importing. Steve Jain has invaluable resources for making the boot image to install Windows 95. www.essjae.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.