Is Virtual PC Runnable on an iBook?

[beez7777]

I have a 1.33 ghz iBook with 1.5 gb of ram. Will i be able to run Virtual PC on this without it being painfully slow? I'm not going to be using it for anything graphic or processor intensive, I just want to switch online poker rooms and the one i want to use is only windows compatible. Anyone have any experience? Also, which version of windows would run best?

 

[mad jew]

Windows 2000 will run give the best compromise of usability and performance IMO. However, for anything more than the most basic of apps, VPC will run like a dog on your iBook. Online poker should be fine though.

 

[ahunter3]

Windows 2000 will run give the best compromise of usability and performance IMO. However, for anything more than the most basic of apps, VPC will run like a dog on your iBook. Online poker should be fine though.

Begging your pardon, but Windows NT will blow W2K out of the water in VPC performance and will run most of the same apps. It's enough of a difference to be worth keeping a virtual hard drive of each, and using W2K only for things that NT won't run at all.

I don't know if you have any old 68K applications (or even Classic apps at all) that you still run, but Windows apps under NT under VPC will run at almost the same speed and responsiveness as 68K apps (which also have to run under emulation).

On an iBook you can vun VPC 6, the last Connectix version. Try to snag a copy, eBay or used-software merchants if necessary. It's more flexible and will let you install and run older MS operating systems and non-MS operating systems with less hassle than the Microsoft VPC 7 which really really wants you to be deploying Windows 2000 or XP.

 

[mad jew]

Begging your pardon, but Windows NT will blow W2K out of the water in VPC performance and will run most of the same apps. It's enough of a difference to be worth keeping a virtual hard drive of each, and using W2K only for things that NT won't run at all.

Fair enough, point taken. I see 2000 as a slightly more complete OS but I guess for online poker, NT would be fine. Maybe check with the people who run the site first.

 

[steelfist]

I run windows xp with all the stuff turned off at: my computer-right click>properties>advanced> performance section> settings> check best performance

and it ran kinda fine. you should use virtual PC to instal that little program that increases performance and adds drag and drop from mac to pc interface.

it runs fine on my ibook, 1.33 ghz, but it had 1 gb of ram though

 

[bousozoku]

Fair enough, point taken. I see 2000 as a slightly more complete OS but I guess for online poker, NT would be fine. Maybe check with the people who run the site first.

Besides, NT doesn't still have 20,000+ outstanding bugs as Win2000 does.

Considering that I have run Win98 and VPC 5.0 on a G3/400 with 768 MB, I think the iBook will be just fine. Regardless of the machine, you need patience--it isn't a native operating system on real hardware. You may also want to check out Guest PC.

 

[mfacey]

I have WinXP Pro running on my set up (see sig.). Its not hugely fast, but as long as you allocate it the maximum amount of ram (512MB i believe) it runs ok. I only use it sometimes for websites that really won't run in Safari/Firefox. And some other study related apps that are windows only. I wouldn't fork out the huge price unless you're sure it runs well and you're going to use it. I managed to get mine with Office 2004 Pro for a really decent price.

 

[mad jew]

...but as long as you allocate it the maximum amount of ram (512MB i believe) it runs ok.

For future reference, only do this if you have over 1GB of RAM in your iBook (which you do). You want to set this value at less than half what your total RAM amount is to avoid excessive Virtual RAM usage.

Besides, NT doesn't still have 20,000+ outstanding bugs as Win2000 does.

But where's the fun in running a bug-free version of Windows? Keep things spontaneous.

 

[Atlasland]

I use Windows 98. Better than 2000 or any others. Still quite slow, but better than any other versions. Using it on themachine in my sig.

 

[Lacero]

I ran Virtual PC Windows 98 on my PB 1.33 GHz machine fine. I used it to log into the Zone.com and I lived inside Room 1 of one of the game rooms for over 3 months. People were yelling at me to give up Room 1, which I eventually did since my DSL connection finally crapped out. I'm not sure how helpful this post was in answering your question.

Here's to the Crazy Ones ​

 

[7254278]

Sorry to go off topic but, I had win 95, 98, ME and XP box and I've hear about windows NT but I never knew what it was, care to enlighten me?

 

[MisterMe]

Sorry to go off topic but, I had win 95, 98, ME and XP box and I've hear about windows NT but I never knew what it was, care to enlighten me?

Windows NT was released in the early 1990's. It was essentially MS-OS/2 with the MS Windows API. Microsoft released Win NT 3.1 following its withdrawal from its partnership with IBM to develop OS/2. However, commandline OS/2 apps work in Win NT. Microsoft tried to merge its MS-DOS based Windows 95/98/Me and Windows NT branches with the Windows NT-based Windows 2000. The merger was a failure, but Win 2000 run respect for its robustness. With Win XP, Microsoft again attempted to merge its MS-DOS based Windows branch with its Win NT branch. Most people agree that it succeeded on its second attempt. However, various versions Windows 2000 served users from the desktop to the enterprise. Windows NT does not serve the enterprise. Windows 2003 serves the enterprise, but does not serve the desktop. It would seem that Microsoft has a way to go before completely unifying its OS offerings.

FWIW, Windows XP SP2 is really Windows NT 5.1.

MS developed Windows NT for the PPC. However, it dropped development of the OS following its failure to coerce IBM and Apple into paying for the project.

MS used PowerMac G5s running special versions of Win NT/PPC to develop the software for the Xbox 360.