Virtual PC 7 Delayed

[fatfish]

Sad

I consider it so sad that anyone is still thinking VPC.

Only two possible reasons that make me even give it a moments thought.

Gaming - waste of time, yes much more on the windows platform, but not a patch on a dedicated game consul, anyway VPC won't do the job whatever you have heard.

Clients who want you to use a PC - forget 'em, any client who dictates what computer you use is the type that will have you wiping their backside for them, you don't need 'em.

So M$ have delayed VPC, so who cares.

 

[littlejim]

I've always believed that Apple should have bought the Virtual PC technology a long, long time ago. Apple used to (rightly) make such a song and dance about how important VPC was ... and it was one of the best trump cards I could play when convincing PC users to switch.

So the fact that Microsoft have yet again delayed the release date for VPC 7 is no suprise to me whatsoever.

 

[eric_n_dfw]

As if microsoft could give a sh*t about the release date. The fact that they are trying to fix bugs before release says it all. - And any optimisation will be when exactly??

Could this project be slowed down any further. To actually buy out connectix is proof enough that they dont want any kind of comparison of window on a mac over a pc, to be available.

What a joke. - bothered

Not to sound like a MS supporter, but the hurdles involved in getting VPC to run at any acceptable speed on a G5 are huge. As has been talked about here ad-nausium when the G5 came out (do a search) it is lacking hardware endian conversion which all prior PowerPC chips back to at least the 603 had. We're also talking about very low level, optimized machine code here. Probably the most complex application code being worked on for the Mac anywhere.

Emulators can be relatively easy to write (provided you have the spec's on the thing you are emulating); but FAST emulators - especialy one as complex as emulating an entire PC - are mind bogglingly complex. Ever play MAME - I remember when I finally got a machine fast enough to handle Galaga: it was a Pentium 100Mhz. To emulate a machine running on an 8 bit chip at single digit clock speeds.

Also from what I've read, I believe MS bought Connectix for two reasons:
- Connectix saw the writing on the wall with the G5 hardware problem and didn't want (or didn't have the resources) to deal with it.
- Microsoft needed a good way to run 32Bit windows (x86) on 64Bit Windows and the relatively new VirtualPC for Windows could be ported to 64Bit Win API's - thus allowing legacy, 32bit apps to run in a kind of "classic" environment on XP 64 Bit Edition.

Connectix wanted out of the market and MS needed into it. VPC for Mac is gravy - I'm actually surprised they didn't can it the day they bought the rights.

 

[eric_n_dfw]

For the record we have a PC that we use for some office applications that only run on Windows - most notably QuickBooks.

We have it under the desk with a $60 USB KVM switch and also run vncserver on it for when we want to see both screens.

 

[fatfish]

HA Ha

I've always believed that Apple should have bought the Virtual PC technology a long, long time ago. Apple used to (rightly) make such a song and dance about how important VPC was ... and it was one of the best trump cards I could play when convincing PC users to switch.

Apple buy an app that will promote Windows - Perhaps the sort of thing discussed at the Irish college of economics - get real.

Apple never made a song and dance about VPC, just pointed out that it was available for cross platform compatability. Since then both Apple and M$ have made it that cross platform compatability can be acheived without VPC.

 

[advocate]

Uhhhh, what? If the only reason you want a G5 is to run VPC really fast and run PC applications...why not just buy a PC?

Uhhhhhh, what? Did you see the word another?

 

[fatfish]

Not Wanted

Also from what I've read, I believe MS bought Connectix for two reasons:
- Connectix saw the writing on the wall with the G5 hardware problem and didn't want (or didn't have the resources) to deal with it.
- Microsoft needed a good way to run 32Bit windows (x86) on 64Bit Windows and the relatively new VirtualPC for Windows could be ported to 64Bit Win API's - thus allowing legacy, 32bit apps to run in a kind of "classic" environment on XP 64 Bit Edition.

As I understand it M$ bought VPC from connectix not connectix. For what it's worth my angle is 1. Connectix got shut, they could see that it was going to be less and less useful for the Mac and increasingly difficult to produce for the PC. 2. M$ will need to radically alter the way windows works if they are to catch up with OSX, they will need to alter things so radically they will be in danger of leaving millions of people in the past who won't or can't buy a new PC. VPC will bridge the gap just nicely.

If VPC 7 ever comes out for the mac, my guess is it will be the last one.

 

[omnivector]

if you pay $30 for bochs you deserve to have those retards take your money. bochs is OPEN SOURCE. just compile the thing yourself. sheesh don't give some company $30 of your money because you couldn't install darwinports or fink.

 

[marke]

What is "PC", and what is this "Windows" thing everyone keeps talking about?

 

[littlejim]

Apple buy an app that will promote Windows - Perhaps the sort of thing discussed at the Irish college of economics - get real.

Apple never made a song and dance about VPC, just pointed out that it was available for cross platform compatability. Since then both Apple and M$ have made it that cross platform compatability can be acheived without VPC.

At the moment, it is in Apple's interest to promote Windows compatability.
One might not like it, but it makes damn good economics to me (BTW, Irish Economics is very highly regarded in Europe).
Do a search on this web site - or any other web site - as to just how important M$ Access, M$ Visio, M$ Project, or even just to simply see what their web site looks like on the 'other' platform.

And can someone tell me how, for example, to test a Flash movie that relies on Active-X without VPC or a PC if this magical cross platform compatability is achieveable?!

 

[AidenShaw]

- Microsoft needed a good way to run 32Bit windows (x86) on 64Bit Windows and the relatively new VirtualPC for Windows could be ported to 64Bit Win API's - thus allowing legacy, 32bit apps to run in a kind of "classic" environment on XP 64 Bit Edition.

Not quite. WOW64 was already out by then. You might have heard that NT has a 16-bit Windows environment (WOW-Windows On Windows) that runs 16-bit applications in a subsystem on the 32-bit NT system. No need for CPU emulation, the x86 has the 16-bit instruction set as well as the 32-bit. WOW (or NTVDM - NT Virtual DOS Machine) remapped (or "thunked") the 16-bit API calls into the 32-bit equivalents.

WOW64 is more or less the same - it provides a 32-bit API environment on top of the 64-bit Windows systems that are now shipping. (Note that software emulation of x86-32 comes from Intel, not MS (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/ipf/ia32el.mspx and http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20040113comp.htm).


Microsoft wanted Connectix Virtual Server - for running Windows virtual machines on top of Windows hosts. Two very important market needs:

1. Legacy apps - run old stuff in NT4 or Win2K virtual systems on top of Win2K3 servers
2. Server consolidation - got 5 apps that all insist on port 80 for their web interface? Run them in 5 virtual machines on one Windiows 2003 host

Virtual PC for Mac was only a footnote in the discussion....

 

[ingenious]

Microsoft you better do it right if your going to delay it!

you're joking right? i could care less if VPC7 was delayed, but then again, i never use VPC and prolly never will. To me, running Windows on my mac is kind of hypocritical, not to mention dangerous (would you leave your car unlocked with the windows rolled down and the keys in the ignition on the bad side of town with a sticky note that says "do not enter?" )!

 

[DaveClarkOne]

What is "PC", and what is this "Windows" thing everyone keeps talking about?

PC is short for Piece of Crap, which is why you should throw it through your Windows.

 

[ZildjianKX]

I consider it so sad that anyone is still thinking VPC.

Only two possible reasons that make me even give it a moments thought.

Gaming - waste of time, yes much more on the windows platform, but not a patch on a dedicated game consul, anyway VPC won't do the job whatever you have heard.

Clients who want you to use a PC - forget 'em, any client who dictates what computer you use is the type that will have you wiping their backside for them, you don't need 'em.

So M$ have delayed VPC, so who cares.

What you said is true, but not entirely... there are some very important programs that are PC only that some mac users need to use and don't want to use a PC to do them. You may not care about the delay, but a lot of people do (myself included).

 

[nagromme]

I consider it so sad that anyone is still thinking VPC.

Only two possible reasons that make me even give it a moments thought.

Don't forget the MOST useful reason, IMO: buying and lugging one laptop instead of two! "Just get a cheap PC" doesn't do much for mobile users--and I love mobility even when I don't strictly need it. (Not to mention, I find you get what you pay for with a "cheap PC." An overpriced doorstop when it breaks down the week after warranty. That's what I got BEFORE I went with VPC. I now prefer the convenience of VPC to the speed of my real PC--the eMachines that can't be turned off without pulling the plug!)

 

[Stecchino]

If i was to get a PC to compliment my mac, I would buy a case from here and use a monitor with dual inputs... another reason not to buy an Apple Studio Display. I would Remote Desktop Connection for most of my windows needs, or just switch the video inputs. You could use a USB switch box to switch your mouse and keyboard from the mac to the PC...

Thanks for posting that link. I really like those Shuttle cases. Very compact, very nice alternative to an all-out Alienware system for PC gaming.

 

[AtlantaGuy]

So who cares? I do.

I consider it so sad that anyone is still thinking VPC.
Only two possible reasons that make me even give it a moments thought.
Gaming - waste of time, yes much more on the windows platform, but not a patch on a dedicated game consul, anyway VPC won't do the job whatever you have heard.
Clients who want you to use a PC - forget 'em, any client who dictates what computer you use is the type that will have you wiping their backside for them, you don't need 'em.
So M$ have delayed VPC, so who cares.

"So who cares?"... I do.

Here in the adult world we have work to do. I just bought a 2.8gHz, 512 MB RAM, Windows XP-equipped PC and a 17" CRT for $700 for the sole purpose of running a single indispensible real estate database application that has no Mac equivalent.

Yes, my first choice would be to use an OS X version of that app (or an equivalent)... it does not exist, and never will. My second choice would be to run that PC app on a 17" PowerBook G5 with VPC 7... those products do not yet exist.

I'd like to have alternatives, but childish posturing won't accomplish anything. I'll use whatever is necessary to get the job done.

 

[AidenShaw]

have patience, grasshopper

the eMachines that can't be turned off without pulling the plug!

Press and hold the power switch for six seconds, it should turn off....

 

[iLilana]

vpc

it would be cheaper to buy a used celeron 600... plus it works better


how necessary is windows to non gamers? oh well

 

[ingenious]

"So who cares?"... I do.

Here in the adult world we have work to do. I just bought a 2.8gHz, 512 MB RAM, Windows XP-equipped PC and a 17" CRT for $700 for the sole purpose of running a single indispensible real estate database application that has no Mac equivalent.

Yes, my first choice would be to use an OS X version of that app (or an equivalent)... it does not exist, and never will. My second choice would be to run that PC app on a 17" PowerBook G5 with VPC 7... those products do not yet exist.

I'd like to have alternatives, but childish posturing won't accomplish anything. I'll use whatever is necessary to get the job done.

looks like you just wasted $700 and set yourself up to be flamed.

 

[eric_n_dfw]

looks like you just wasted $700 and set yourself up to be flamed.

If he's making money on his real estate investments because he's more productive due to that software then let him be flamed - all the way to the bank.

 

[evilbert420]

Aidenshaw is correct

Aidenshaw is correct. Microsoft bought VirtualPC so that it could virtualize server sessions... for their VirtualServer product that's coming this year.

Companies are still running poorly-written software on servers that's tied to NT4. New server hardware typically can't run NT4, but new hardware can run Server 2003, with those apps running in virtual NT4 sessions. Old servers cost money to maintain, and often more than new servers if a replacement part is needed within a 2-4 hour service window.

You conspiracy theorists never stop, do you?

 

[itsa]

This would be really great. Although they said they couldn't test it because it was too unstable.

That would be the ONLY reason I would buy it!

 

[ZildjianKX]

looks like you just wasted $700 and set yourself up to be flamed.

Wow, that was one of the worst comments I've read in awhile...

 

[ryanw]

Pay Attention, Microsoft is SLY.

I think they're lying, or at least not saying the WHOLE truth. I think the reason for the delay of Virtual PC 7 is YES, they're rewriting the API so it works with the PowerPC 970 processor (G5), BUT their driving factor for the re-write of the API is to make it so that they can easily integrate the VirtualPC APIs on the future XBOX for backward compatibility for old x86 games.