Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm really glad to see this for one simple reason. Not because I think that the 'Evil Empire' is planning the demise of VPC. No, I expect they'll keep it up and going, at least for now. I think this is a good thing because it has been my impression that ever since SoftWindows left the market VPC has stagnated. What motive did they have to push their product forward? I felt that VPC 2 runs faster using Win95 on an old 603 based Mac than VPC 5 runs on a new machine running at three times the clock speed, with four times as much memory. It used to be that every new release of VPC they were announcing speed enhancements (usually comparing their improvements not only to the previous version of VPC but also to the latest version of SoftWindows). But, lately, I don't recall seeing a single announcement about 'improved speed'. It's always about 'New Features', which I have to wonder if they aren't just making VPC into another piece of proverbial 'bloatware'.

But now they have competition again. It'll be a good thing...
 
Re: Yujenisis

Number 2: Microsoft wants to make money, and lots of it.

Number 2a: Microsoft *only* makes software for a reason. It doesn't hurt Microsoft at all to possibly canabalize PC sales so that they can sell more software. Thus, the thought that Microsoft will 'discontinue' VirtualPC is silly, if only because Microsoft sees that they can sell MORE copies of Windows to us Mac users-additionally charge more for it because they are also selling the emulator.
OK granted they want to make money, but, and this is a big one, M$'s real income meaning the majority of it, comes from server product liscencing. Yes selling Mac prodcuts makes them $, but not like the amounts they make from Windoze products on a per computer basis. The real $ comes from the business software on those computers, so think that they have Windoze itself, some profit $, then Office, more $, then a client seat on the network, lots of $.

Number 4: MacBU, I believe has done a wonderful job with the Macintosh versions of popular Microsoft products. Being someone that switches platforms frequently during the day MacBU's offerings are completely superior to their PC equivilents. It just goes to show you how far a small group of extremely talented people within Microsoft can make all the other parts look bad. I have faith in MacBU even if they do work for Microsoft.
OK they do decent work, and they are doing pretty well, no disagreements with that, what does scare me is that they arent a seperate company, they take orders from above, and its those orders that we should worry about.

Number 6: There is no evidence to support the paranoid and pretty irrational theory that Microsoft 'bought' VirtualPC just to have a Fat Tony to twist Apple's arm. Microsoft stifles the industry, and has caused more destruction to the world than created-but don't always jump to conclusions.
Well no, no evidence per se, just many many years of a track record of lies, deceipt, and business practices that would make Saddam cringe at the evilness.


Call me niave if you will. I think some of us are a little too paranoid. Then again, no one knows until it happens. So I can't say anything for sure and either can anybody else.

I am just going by what I know and by what logic and Microsoft's past moves would dictate. [/B]
Well M$'s past moves are the scary part, and logic from a conventional point of view doesnt really apply to M$. And remember you aren't paranoid if they are after you.

Aaron
 
Re: Re: Yujenisis

Originally posted by aaroncd
Well no, no evidence per se, just many many years of a track record of lies, deceipt, and business practices that would make Saddam cringe at the evilness.

microsoft bought connectix's Virtual Machine Technology. They wanted this because it allows MS server 2003 and up (that nobody in serverland is upgrading too) to run older MS OSes, like NT. They hope that admins will migrate their working box+NT install to a virtual machine on a 2003 box. This way they wil sell more licenses, and they hope more people will start adopting their .net crap.
An an unfortunate side efect for MS (and for us? time wil tell), they also got VPC with this deal, because it shares the VM technology/patents.
 
Good for us, bad for FWB

Anyone remember Word 6? It sucked, so Corel updated WordPerfect (was it even Corel at that point?). People bought WordPerfect. Microsoft didn't like someone else getting money, so they turned Word into a good app with Word 98. Everyone bought Word, nobody bought WordPerfect, and Corel stopped updating it.

I think that could happen here. Before today, M$ had no reason to do a good job with VPC for Mac. They were the only option. If the new RealPC is any good, M$ won't want to lose money, and they'll make VPC into something better than RealPC.

In the end, M$ will make sure they get our money.
 
RealPC

When I got my first Mac, I looked into RealPC and VPC. I eventually decided on RealPC, and was satisfied with it until I migrated to OS X. I switched to Virtual PC 5, which I tried under both 9 and X, and was never satisfied with. Now I use VPC 6. Acceptable, still not exceptional.

One thing I remember about RealPC was the ability to use emulated 3dfx & 3dfx2 cards. (you had to actually have a 3dfx card to use them) The performance was not great, but games would actually run on it. For most tasks, it was slightly slower but more consistent than Virtual PC, but seemed to emulate peripherals better than VPC.
 
Re: openGL support

Originally posted by phantommaul
hi my question is short and simple is it fair to expect openGL support from VPC or realPc soon. because i know lots of people not swiching jusk because of lack of games

Actually, I don't think many of you would remember one of the best features of RealPC... Voodoo support! RealPC could utilize one or two PCI voodoo cards for Glide support in PC games. This was where RealPC shined over VPC, but VPC had much better compatibility with most other Windows apps. I can't personally vouch for Softwindows - I don't know if FWB kept this feature after they bought out Insignia Solutions. But I know that RealPC supported it and it ran well on my 7600 with a 12mb Voodoo2 card. Obviously, my PC still ran faster with the same cards installed, but the Voodoo support allowed RealPC to play games that other emulators couldn't touch. In fact, the sales pitch for RealPC (while it was still Insignia) was "Run PC games shockingly fast on your Power Mac." 'nuff said. I hope FWB will keep this feature or possibly add support for a second PCI video card just for PC games.
 
Originally posted by MacManiac1224
Does anyone remember the performance of RealPC or Softwindows on their Mac's in the past? Thanks

Yes, on a 6100 / 66 and 5400 / 180.
OK, it was a long time ago, but back then I compared Real PC 1.0.4 and VPC 2.0... both running Wondiws 95. I remember preferring Real PC, as it seemd a bit quicker than VPC. After VPC 2.1 came with Windows 98 pre-installed, I never used Real PC again.
I can assure you I will definitely give Real PC a chance!
 
i've used both real pc and vpc.
only ran win95 and DOS games on real pc and there weren't any problems doing so. other than the fact that directx games didn't run worth a try, it worked fairly well. but by the time i got vpc with win98 that is when the redraw problems, video refresh gunk became painfully obvious. and by then i just used a windows machine for best performance for windows apps.
i never bothered with the FWB updated realPC, but, if they can improve it, best of fortunes to them.
 
haha

Good ol' RealPC. I got it for my PowerCenter Pro210. I even still remember the box...the B&W photo of that guy with his hair sticking up...remember that???
The only PC game I tried to play on it was NBA Live97...yeah I was dying to be able to play EA sports games on my mac....it ran ok but frame rates were just too slow to really enjoy the game. *sniff*
Oh yeah, and I never did get the sound to work...
 
sounds like they are pretty confident that it will be good. they said 30 days, sounds to me like they have had it done for a while, just waiting for an occasion to come up to release it.

iJon
 
Originally posted by old_macpro
If I remember correctly, the difference between SoftWindows and VPC was that Softwindows used a modified version of Windows. It had some tuning changes to get it to operate correctly on the Mac Hardware (through the emulator).

VPC on the other hand emulated the hardware itself, so that Windows didn't know the difference. I'm not sure about later versions of Softwindows, but it would be interesting to see if Microsoft would continue the license if they were also selling VPC.

The difference between RealPC and VPC was that VPC emulates the underlying hardware, allowing any Intel compatible operating system work on it - I suppose Linux would work on VPC (is there such a version now?). RealPC only mimics the operating system itself. At the time that was still Windows 95.

I wonder how much new code would be required to get RealPC updated to XP and to run within OS X?
 
What about Apple?

They still think about PC hardware and PC software.

I believe, that time comes when OSX will contain w32 module to run w32 apps in native mode.

I think that Avie has done a great job as Apples software general.
 
Virtual PC is very weird with games. I have a game called Skunny Kart and that works at full speed on a 486/DX2 but in Virtual PC 6 the game runs as slow as a slow 286 would run it (since the min specs is a 286). I have a another game called Worms Armageddon, it works at full speed but the mouse goes crazy in the game. I also have two other games called Streets of Sim City and Sim Copter, which run perfectly under VPC.
 
Originally posted by MacManiac1224
Yujenisis, you said there is a possible port of WINE being ported, do you have a link to the site where they would be doing that? Thanks

There isn't a link. But it is GPL software so the potential is always there. Don't get your hopes up.

Personally, I don't think it's likely (As WINE is for x86 emulation, and they would have to do a lot of work to get it to run on RISC). But it could be done, I just doubt you would get people who would be willing to do it and continue updating it for free. If you want to play games you absolutely have to get a PC. Unfortunate as it may be. It is a reality. Unless the current state of Mac gaming is fine for you, then you can just keep doing what you are doing.

Either that or you can take the plunge into console gaming to fufill your gaming desires.
 
Forget emulation, Here's a BETTER solution !!!

Hmmmmmm. If you have a PC AND a Mac, you should download the Remote Desktop Client for the Mac (OSX only I think). Put in the IP address of your PC as the "server" and ensure that it is running terminal services (or WinXP) and voila ! - hey presto you will have a login screen for your PC - log in as usual and you have a FULL SPEED PC running in a window on your Mac. This works for me (though I do not run any games so can't comment on the speed - a fast network connection would help here !) 😛 😛
 
WINE

WINE is not an emulator - an implementation of it on a PPC hardare platform is feasable but would require the Window's applications you want to run to be ported to PPC as well.

This has been talked about a lot here in the past. (here's one 200+ message thread)

Before posting anything else about WINE, we all would do well to read their FAQ .

Trivial info: WINE is a recursive acronym (like GNU) for:
Wine
Is
Not an
Emulator.
(source: http://sourceforge.net/projects/wine/ )
 
On a 68020

I first remember running RealPC (or SoftWindows) on my Original LC. It was so fast that I could hunt and peck faster than DOS edit. Now that is raw power!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.