Buyin' a powerbook -- will Virtual PC work well?
Hey Guys,
After much deliberating, I've decided to take the jump into the Mac OS world, with a 12" Powerbook. I like the small footprint (compared to everything else) and faster processor (compared to iBook).
One thing I don't like though, is the limit on RAM. I would want to run VirtualPC occasionally, I think, for apps that aren't supported on Mac (like MS Visio) and I'd like it to run smoothly.
If I maxed out the RAM to 1.25gb, do you think I'd get good performance?
I'm not sure this is a deal breaker for me, but I"d like to know what I'm getting myself into.
Any other advice you guys have would be apprecited as well.
Thanks!
After much deliberating, I've decided to take the jump into the Mac OS world, with a 12" Powerbook. I like the small footprint (compared to everything else) and faster processor (compared to iBook).
One thing I don't like though, is the limit on RAM. I would want to run VirtualPC occasionally, I think, for apps that aren't supported on Mac (like MS Visio) and I'd like it to run smoothly.
If I maxed out the RAM to 1.25gb, do you think I'd get good performance?
I'm not sure this is a deal breaker for me, but I"d like to know what I'm getting myself into.
Any other advice you guys have would be apprecited as well.
Thanks!
Comments
Originally posted by jgordner
One thing I don't like though, is the limit on RAM. I would want to run VirtualPC occasionally, I think, for apps that aren't supported on Mac (like MS Visio) and I'd like it to run smoothly.
The RAM limit is not really a problem for running VPC. I have tried VPC with W2k and allocating to it more than 128 MB of system RAM did nothing. Or rather it did, it gave performance a hit since the total system RAM was 640 MB and there was much more paging activity.
The real limiting factor is the raw processing power of the G4 (held back mainly by its clock speed and FSB) and the fact that there is an instruction translation x86 --> PPC that takes place. So, in your Powerbook this should be translated in VPC like a PC at 900-1000 MHz but without hardware graphics acceleration (the graphics will be rendered by the CPU). So, it will actually feel even slower because of that. However, this is true up to VPC 6. VPC 7 was to change that, but I lost somewhere track of it and I am not sure if it does run graphics directly on the GPU and how well.
If I maxed out the RAM to 1.25gb, do you think I'd get good performance?
1.25 GB of RAM is good for about anything it could make sense to run in a 12" laptop. Now if you have the habit to run simultaneously many memory hungry applications, then even 2 GB may not be enough. It depends on use. But as I said, you have to look at this in context: it does not make much sense to run in a 12" display so many applications at the same time.
As for VPC, which Windows edition are you going to run? If it is WInXP, make sure to strip down the system graphics (make it look like W2k, which is considered as the golden rule for VPC usage); it will improve performance.
Oh, and welcome to the Mac world!
Originally posted by jgordner
Hey Guys,
After much deliberating, I've decided to take the jump into the Mac OS world, with a 12" Powerbook. I like the small footprint (compared to everything else) and faster processor (compared to iBook).
One thing I don't like though, is the limit on RAM. I would want to run VirtualPC occasionally, I think, for apps that aren't supported on Mac (like MS Visio) and I'd like it to run smoothly.
If I maxed out the RAM to 1.25gb, do you think I'd get good performance?
I'm not sure this is a deal breaker for me, but I"d like to know what I'm getting myself into.
Any other advice you guys have would be apprecited as well.
Thanks!
Originally posted by crookedspoon
Don't count on getting any serious work done... VPC works well enough to get something done occasionaly (in my case: check how my webpages work on Win)... It works, but it's VERY slow and external hardware is rarely supported. Buy any cheapo Win-laptop and though you might spend some more money (as compared to buying VPC), you'll have a -way- more responsive win-environment.
Well, I'd only be getting VPC because it comes with MS Office, so the cost thing isn't really an issue. But that's unfortunate to hear that it's not really useable for any real work, even at 1.25gb of RAM
Originally posted by Aquatic
Um it is VERY useable. For everything that would work fine on a PC that is only a few years old. It's like using a PC from 4 years ago without graphics acceleration. What's so bad about that? Use Win2k for speed and stability, I'd advise against XP.
Let me support this statement. There are many people today who do their jobs using PCs that are slower than most installations of VPC. I get acceptable performance running Windows 98 on VPC 6.1 on a 266 MHz beige G3. Of course, VPC 7 is faster on my 2.7 GHz dual G5, but it is not that much faster. For those considering VPC as a subsitute for a hardware PC, reconsider. That is not its purpose. For those who advocate buying a cheap PC instead of VPC, you really don't understand the product. VPC can do things that no hardware PC can do. And besides, I don't want to carry a cheap PC with my PowerBook while on travel.
I've got a 15" 1.67 Ghz PowerBook with 1,5Gb RAM
VPC is SLOW: There's a several second wait on doing something as simple as opening a folder. In general, the UI is unresponsive: delays on moving window, closing windows... it takes several seconds to load the content of a contextual menu. Opening Firefox lasts around 1 minute. That's with a clean install of VPC7 and Win 2k (all security-patches, updates and I-don't-know-what applied).
I've tried reinstalling several times, to no avail. Main reason to buy VPC was to do video-chatting with faraway relatives on WinBoxes with Messenger, only to find out afterwards that FireWire devices aren't supported in VPC: so no use for my iSight.
So, IMHO, yes it works, but barely and slow.
Originally posted by Aquatic
Um it is VERY useable. For everything that would work fine on a PC that is only a few years old. It's like using a PC from 4 years ago without graphics acceleration. What's so bad about that? Use Win2k for speed and stability, I'd advise against XP.
However, if you'll be using it at the office or at home exclusively. It probably makes more sense to buy a cheap/used PC for running visio. I consider configuration and maintainance infinately easier with two computers rather than one computer with two OSes and a virtual machine.
Originally posted by jgordner
One thing I don't like though, is the limit on RAM. I would want to run VirtualPC occasionally, I think, for apps that aren't supported on Mac (like MS Visio) and I'd like it to run smoothly.
....
Any other advice you guys have would be apprecited as well.
Thanks!
Yeah, I too was a heavy Visio user until I tried Omnigraffle Pro. Then I bought it and life has been great.
Visio and Omnigraffle are compatible with some export options. I prefer OGP over Visio. OGP is a great program and I am glad I found it.
VPC is acceptable but FrontPage 2003 was dog slow. I never ran Visio but I can't see it being much better. This was on the iMac G5 you see in my sig.
I have installed everything from 98 to XP and believe that 2000 Pro is the best option. XP is, in my opinion, a lot slower than 2000 Pro.
MS made a few changes with VPC 7 - mainly that you can't run anything but 2000 and XP. They have updated VPC 7, but there appears to be a problem with the USB ports so I reinstalled the original VPC 7.0 and have no problems.
In terms of performance, it's fine for the demo and for one medical equipment app that I use. I'm now using it on a 1,5 15" PB with 2 gigs of RAM and have the VPC settings at 448 MB of RAM and 16 MB of VRAM. I downloaded the upgrades to 2000 Pro and then cut 2000 off from internet access (like putting a condom on Windows) to avoid infections of any type.
Look for reasonable performance on light to moderate use, but it's going to be slow for heavy lifting.
Originally posted by Relic
No and no, slower then wet dripping dog shit after it was thrown against a window during the brisk morning of winter after a two hour snow storm during the month of January. If driving nails into your skull with your shoe is considered a pleasurable experience then the answer to you question is still hell no. Buy a PC it will save you money for the inevitable psychologist (doc you got to help me I see hour glasses everywhere) and will save you time. Virtual PC for Mac sheeesh what else will you people recommend, Hemorrhoid cream for a headache.
Swallow some Zoloft and let go of your anger...
Originally posted by aplnub
Swallow some Zoloft and let go of your anger...
Great idea, now are those safe to take after 7 Gibson Martini ?
Then I would consider getting the student version of Office and saving some coin.
VPC is just too dang slow, especially if you try to use XP. Why use 2000? Does MS even support that anymore? If so, for how much longer?
MS has shown no interest in progressing this app and probably have effectively killled it.
Plus, you never know. The upcoming MacTels just may allow multiple OS booting. In that case you may find yourself selling your new Mac and going for the upgrade...
Originally posted by kcmac
The upcoming MacTels just may allow multiple OS booting. In that case you may find yourself selling your new Mac and going for the upgrade...
I believe we all need to be on the same page. Gamers want a dual boot and the rest of us want to windows app's inside OS X.
I want the later.
Maybe we an get BOTH.
As for the desktop (at only 800 Mhz), VPC runs nicely on that. I've got identical drive images set on my desktop and the laptop. VPC on the desktop runs smoothly and responsive. I've even used it to do some cross-platform development work with.
I've got drive images with Windows98, Windows 2000 Pro and Windows XP. Windows 2000 Pro is the fastest of all three. VPC has some nice features. By default, when you quit with CMD-Q, VPC will save the state of the running PC images....even if you are in the middle of a program. When you launch it the next time, the drive image is restored exactly the way you left it (without having to boot Windows again...works like "safe-sleep" on a laptop). It also has a feature called "undo drives" where you can select to save changes to the drive or abandon them. This allows you to install and test programs and when done with your evaluation, you can discard changes and be back to where you started. You can also drag and drop files from one environment to another.
Yes, its an emulated environment and will never be as fast as a native PC, but that is not the purpose. It's to provide you functionality you couldn't obtain otherwise.
Originally posted by pubguy
Yes, its an emulated environment and will never be as fast as a native PC, but that is not the purpose. It's to provide you functionality you couldn't obtain otherwise.
I know what you probably meant here, it just came out kind of funny. There are other ways of obtaining this functionality.