As long as I can still get the Win 98 version of VPC, I'm happy. That's the fastest version, and so lets hope MS leaves that as an option for me.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MS Office and Virtual PC 6.1
- Thread starter MacBytes
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Some of us have to have VPC
I can't get away from it - I run a proprietary business app under VPC on my laptop when traveling overseas. Have both 98 and XP and 98 does run faster. It also helps a market for Access, which I also need for that one app, as well as other possible MS apps.
As for MS dropping it, I doubt that very much. I have a feeling that MS will make more off of selling us VPC with Windows than they do selling a copy of Windows to Dell. It can be a nice cash flow for them.
I also think that MS will be working on a version for Panther and will be able to speed it up more than a little. They will probably limit the versions available to XP, with 98 possible.
VPC does have some problems that MS can address without too much effort. Now VPC can't capture the PC card slot on the PB, there are problems getting a USB to serial adapter to work (helpful in the medical field) and even when you have a gig of memory you can only allot half of it to VPC. The issue for me is that MS can call in-house programmers for issues that MBU are having problems with.
MS sees a market and I think the MBU guys are going to work hard to make it a better and faster app. I sure hope so!
I can't get away from it - I run a proprietary business app under VPC on my laptop when traveling overseas. Have both 98 and XP and 98 does run faster. It also helps a market for Access, which I also need for that one app, as well as other possible MS apps.
As for MS dropping it, I doubt that very much. I have a feeling that MS will make more off of selling us VPC with Windows than they do selling a copy of Windows to Dell. It can be a nice cash flow for them.
I also think that MS will be working on a version for Panther and will be able to speed it up more than a little. They will probably limit the versions available to XP, with 98 possible.
VPC does have some problems that MS can address without too much effort. Now VPC can't capture the PC card slot on the PB, there are problems getting a USB to serial adapter to work (helpful in the medical field) and even when you have a gig of memory you can only allot half of it to VPC. The issue for me is that MS can call in-house programmers for issues that MBU are having problems with.
MS sees a market and I think the MBU guys are going to work hard to make it a better and faster app. I sure hope so!
Re: Re: Box graphics
I meant the ms office box, which used to use puzzle pieces for each of the components (word, excel, etc.).
I meant the ms office box, which used to use puzzle pieces for each of the components (word, excel, etc.).
Hardly. That argument doesnt work either. You are assuming that every switcher will use VPC. (In my case its true.) If users start switching to Mac without plunking down the cash for VPC, and a license for Windows, that is a lost sales opportunity for Microsoft. It all depends on how well VPC sells down the road.
If sales of Mac's start creeping up without additional sales in VPC and sales of windows decreases Microsoft could simply pull the plug on VPC and Office and possibly force those who are dependant on VPC and Office to reconsider. Even more so in a business environment.
Portability. Travel. Dorms. Reasons like that.
$150 for VPC with MS Office included is another good reason.
Originally posted by Lord Bodak
(And when I get my PowerBook I'll be switching to a Mac mail app-- any advice on how to convert years of Eudora Light mail to a standard format?)
Mac OS X Mail imports Eudora. I don't know if that's compatible with Eudora Light, but it's worth a shot.
They wouldn't gain anything that way. Instead of VPC, people would buy PC's. It's a sale of Windows either way, so no gain for Microsoft. People who don't need to run Windows software still aren't going to buy Windows in any form if Microsoft cancells VPC.
If people switch to Mac and don't buy VPC, then Microsoft won't make any more money by cancelling VPC.
As of the 5.0 product line, Eudora Light and Eudora (Pro) have been the same program. The only difference has been that Light crippled some features. Light becomes Pro with the entering of a registration key. (You can also use Pro's features for free in Ad mode, where you gotta deal with advertisements in the program window).
There should be no difference at all in file formats. Perhaps there was in the past (although I still don't think so), but not any longer.
My Eudora Light/Pro email has made it over years of different Eudora versions and now resides in Ximian Evolution. Hopefully when I get my PowerBook, it can go to OS X's Mail app.
Not to pick on you personally, but some people need to get out of their Mac-centric shell. The number of Windows licenses sold to Mac users VirtualPC represents is piddly compared to the number of licenses they get for enterprise-class virtual machines.
To understand what Microsoft's intent is with Virtual PC, you need to take a hard look at VMware. This started out as a pretty good emulator to allow Linux users to run Windows without reboot. Now it is used by enterprises for server consolidation (this allows you to run many different applications which may have different hardware/software requirements on a single physical machine), software development and testing (you can test many different configurations of OS/drivers/applications without hundreds of machines), disaster recovery and high availability (basically this means you can run a single server with a drive array to provision all your other machines with whatever OS it needs, you also have the ability to "roll back" a computer to any OS or saved machine state), security (since each virtual machine runs independently (and you'll be running your enterprise apps in separate virtual machines), a security hole found in one does not grant access to another app), training (basically this is a situation where you need to roll back client machines to the same sane state after users have done a hands-on instruction), sales demos (if you need to show an interaction between a number of clients and servers, you can do so on a single machine running multiple virtual machines), and help desk/tech support (the tech support version of development/testing).
Now realize that when Microsoft acquired VirtualPC, Connectix already had Virtual PC running on Windows and you have a simple case of "let's bootstrap our code process via acquisition so that we can leverage our monopoly to take over a lucrative market." The Mac support comes along for the ride, but it's kid stuff.
Yes, you are thinking of Real PC which still has yet to make a Mac OS X compatible version. At first guess, it'll take a lot more work than it seems because VirtualPC emulated the machine while SoftWindows started as a Windows emulator. It's obvious now where the money is.
I doubt that the open source world needs the SoftWindows codebase. If you don't know already, there is already Bochs which runs on x86 and PPC and on many operating systems (including Mac). I'd imagine the codebase is much cleaner, by virtue of its late start.
If you look at the above applications of VMWare, you'll see that the latest VirtualPC on the Mac can do any of those (but in some cases, it wouldn't be advisable).
If you were a web developer like me, you'd think differently. Last year, I purchased Extreme Programming for Web Projects for a friend--if you don't know what XP is (the real XP), it's a very popular programming practice. The book, part of a series started by the creator of XP, tries to apply this process to web programming. In it they recommend (many times throughout the book, actually), that everyone in the company standardize on the Windows platform for all web development (even for graphics work and even when deploying on J2EE in Linux).
Anyone who has used Virtual PC realizes that their arguments reek of ignorance. In fact, according to their arguments, Mac OS X with Virtual PC would represent the superior platform to develop on: As a web developer, a single programmer on a single Mac notebook can develop J2EE, PHP, (or even ASP.NET) for deployment on Linux, MacOS X, (or even Windows) tested on nearly every version of Windows on nearly every browser (including obscure ones like Safari, Konquerer, OmniWeb, etc). A web developer can use only-on-Windows cell phone emulators for WAP and use the infinitely-superior-because-it-is-free-and-programmable CVS for version control while at the same time doing it all from their Mac OS X dock.
(Any Mac owner (as well as numerous studies) can further refute the need to standardize on any single platform.)
Yes, I own a number of "cheap PC"s. Heck, just last week I cannibalized one to repair a Intel 810 mobo that shorted out for a friend. But for some of us, being able to carry about 20 "cheap PC"s on our shoulder and run any of them at a moments notice (concurrently) can be a real boon.
Take care,
terry