View Full Version : Microsoft f&$k VPC7. What a suprise!
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=651
I am sure you guys have read this....
I happen to have seen a *cough*copy*cough* of *cough*M$VPC7*cough* and they sure have done a M$ on it....
Are we suprised!? :rolleyes:
onlyafterdark
2004-09-15, 21:56
Nope not at all.
alcimedes
2004-09-15, 22:24
the only really interesting part was the native graphics card setting. now it's just a basic revision of what was already there. yay.
trailmaster308
2004-09-15, 22:27
This just pisses me off to no end! I can't believe M$ would do this kind of thing. Who the hell do they think they are!! Thats it I am done using their crap and getting a Mac. :mad:
....wait a minute. I don't use their BJ of an OS. errrr forget what I said.
If I had known they had just wanted a bog standard port I would have done it at home for them. They could have given it to me a YEAR AGO!!! and let's say $50,000 and I would have ported it for them myself!
Are they smoking weed up at Redmond these days? Or have they just got a monster Heroin habit or something?
If a software developer had not delivered on 'Longhaul' and then after a year said 'oops sorry we haven't done ANYTHING AT ALL on that VPthingy project either.. sorry!' they would be sued to high heaven and never work again!
Jesus!
I think I will just hack my own version of VP6 and use that on my G5!!
trailmaster308
2004-09-15, 22:56
What are you needing VP7 for? Just curious.
What are you needing VP7 for? Just curious.
You know what.. I use it for a whole load of silly little things.. Nothing I would die if I didn't have....
I have a Suunto watch which tracks altitude and stuff for flying and skydiving and the software has a GUI which is only PC... It is useable but slow on my G4.
Likewise I use a couple of menu creator things I use for website design. The one I am used to is a PC only piece of software.
I used to use VPC7 mainly for internet banking whilst Safari was going through growing pains ans stuff... but I don't anymore.
I also use it to test web sites work in IE on the PC when developing them too...
Just little things which would be so much nicer if it booted that much quicker on the G5 and ran a little faster...
But I am not going to lose sleep over it really.
I just think it is unbelievable how badly this has got screwed since it was asimilated by M$!
kscherer
2004-09-15, 23:22
I might just point out that you can buy a PC (sic :() for just about double what "M$" charges for VP7. For testing of websites (I am fortunate enough to be enslaved to one at my real job and regularly use it for just this purpose) a cheapy would work fine, be faster, and cover all those other bases you mentioned.
applenut
2004-09-15, 23:27
you can be critical and all....but those features that didn't make the cut were proposed by MS, not by connectix..... without MS, those features probably wouldn't have been possible. Just because they didn't make the cut doesn't mean they won't eventually. The Mac BU makes good software. The changes needed to make it G5 compatible were probably much more challenging then they anticipated and its hard to continue development on a product when the current version doesn't run on half the machines being sold. So, release G5 compatible version, make some money, and continue to work on features that didn't make the cut.
If you need VPC, 7 is for you and you'll buy it because there isn't another choice. If you don't need it, you'll complain about what it isn't and why it sucks. If you think you were going to play games on it even with native 3d support than you're just delusional and wasting your time.
I never thought of that!
You must be joking! Actually have one of those things in the house!
Be gone with ya you evil spirit! ;)
you can be critical and all....but those features that didn't make the cut were proposed by MS, not by connectix..... without MS, those features probably wouldn't have been possible. Just because they didn't make the cut doesn't mean they won't eventually. The Mac BU makes good software. The changes needed to make it G5 compatible were probably much more challenging then they anticipated and its hard to continue development on a product when the current version doesn't run on half the machines being sold. So, release G5 compatible version, make some money, and continue to work on features that didn't make the cut.
If you need VPC, 7 is for you and you'll buy it because there isn't another choice. If you don't need it, you'll complain about what it isn't and why it sucks. If you think you were going to play games on it even with native 3d support than you're just delusional and wasting your time.
Get a life dude!
I take great exception to you thinking anyone here is naeve enough to think you will be able to play games on it!
I also think that suggesting that connectix couldn't come up with new feature ideas it probably the dullest comment in history! Duh! They invented VPC in the first place. M$ only bought it for political reasons as is becoming increasingly clear!
It is plain for all to see that M$ (generally) has problems coding even the simplest things - granted. And the Mac BU team are very good... but this whole thing is a shambles.
I still maintain that pretty much anyone (other than M$) could have had this out with at least some of those features and thought of them for themselves in less than a year.
For M$ to have thaken this long to screw it up this bad is bordering on criminal!
I take great exception to you thinking anyone here is naeve enough to think you will be able to play games on it! It actually isn't too hard to fathom that with native 3D support it could play some decent games. Hell, years ago reviewers were using games like Tomb Raider and Grand Theft Auto when the emulators had support for Voodoo's 3Dfx. So, with a good, working implementation, some great things could have been possible. But, alas, it is not so...
I still maintain that pretty much anyone (other than M$) could have had this out with at least some of those features and thought of them for themselves in less than a year. Bullocks. Tell me why the open source community hasn't been able to do squat for x86 emulation on the Mac, then, if it's so terribly easy.
Bullocks. Tell me why the open source community hasn't been able to do squat for x86 emulation on the Mac, then, if it's so terribly easy.
Brad, I think you misunderstood me.
Firstly, M$ bought the entire developement so they were not exactly scrabbling around the dark. When I said that 'pretty much any developer...' maybe I should have qualified it with something like '... with all of the R&D in their pocket which has been done so far.'
Secondly, I agree x86 emulation is a large undertaking but I think that once Connectix had led the way there was little point for anyone else to follow in their footsteps. I firmly believe that the open source community are capable of such a project and have i) not seen the point of it before Connectix did, ii)have not seen the point of repeating work already done after Connectix did, & iii)have other higher priority stuff / more interesting things to do.
Most of us use VPC for trivial things or the odd convenience. If it did not exist we would not die. As has been pointed out you can always buy a cheap PC for that kind of stuff for less than VPC costs anyway.
As for playing games. What is the point!?!?! :rolleyes:
And another thing.... There is a LOT more to decent game emulation than just native graphics support! The file handling has to be up to scratch and I don't have one tiny bit of faith in M$ for that either!! :lol:
People definitely bicker too much -- but this doesn't change the fact that MS seems to have done very little with VPC 7.
I might just point out that you can buy a PC (sic :() for just about double what "M$" charges for VP7.
kscherer reiterates the most important point about VPC, which we've discussed for many years. Even a cheapo Wal-Mart box will likely perform better than VPC. I have a half-decade old (or older?) Pentium II box sitting under my desk, which I got for $0 at work. It's no space rocket, but it has zero Windows compatibility issues at zero cost. My combination of 12-inch PowerBook and Wintel box sharing one dual-input external LCD is the best setup I've ever had.
If it's something you depend on for work, a $300 Wintel box will likely serve you much better than VPC. The only exception is if you require mobility (i.e. VPC on a PowerBook).
Escher
PS for scratt: Is that Suunto watch that has a Windows software interface a recent model? I have used a Suunto Vector (I think) as a back-up/secondary altimeter when flying my Cloudhopper hot air balloon. But I don't think that model had any kind of PC interface. I need to dig that thing out of the closet and check. ;)
PS for scratt: Is that Suunto watch that has a Windows software interface a recent model? I have used a Suunto Vector (I think) as a back-up/secondary altimeter when flying my Cloudhopper hot air balloon. But I don't think that model had any kind of PC interface. I need to dig that thing out of the closet and check. ;)
It's their X6. New last year(ish). It has a nifty little attachment clippy thing that makes contact with three contacts on the back of the watch.
The other end is a big old 9pin serial joystick type male connector (from back in the stone ages!). I use that and a USB to serial adapter routed through the Mac OS and into VPC... It took a bit of jiggery pokey to get it to work!
It is really cool because it stores alititude information every second when in Log mode. I use it to plot ascent and descent speeds when flying, or skydiving! You get wicked vertical graphs when looking at skydiving data!
:lol:
applenut
2004-09-16, 13:45
Get a life dude!
I take great exception to you thinking anyone here is naeve enough to think you will be able to play games on it!
I also think that suggesting that connectix couldn't come up with new feature ideas it probably the dullest comment in history! Duh! They invented VPC in the first place. M$ only bought it for political reasons as is becoming increasingly clear!
It is plain for all to see that M$ (generally) has problems coding even the simplest things - granted. And the Mac BU team are very good... but this whole thing is a shambles.
I still maintain that pretty much anyone (other than M$) could have had this out with at least some of those features and thought of them for themselves in less than a year.
For M$ to have thaken this long to screw it up this bad is bordering on criminal!
even as an insult you're get a life comment makes no sense. congratulations, you are a failure in all aspects of your post.
kscherer reiterates the most important point about VPC, which we've discussed for many years. Even a cheapo Wal-Mart box will likely perform better than VPC. I have a half-decade old (or older?) Pentium II box sitting under my desk, which I got for $0 at work. It's no space rocket, but it has zero Windows compatibility issues at zero cost. My combination of 12-inch PowerBook and Wintel box sharing one dual-input external LCD is the best setup I've ever had.
If it's something you depend on for work, a $300 Wintel box will likely serve you much better than VPC. The only exception is if you require mobility (i.e. VPC on a PowerBook).
Escher
depends.
VPC provides an integration with the Mac that a stand alone PC box will not provide. With Virtual PC i can copy and paste between PC and Mac. I can switch instantly to the PC, make a change, save it to my desktop....work on it in a mac application and vice versa.
VPC has many uses that are worth the price. And now that it is on the G5 It's likely much faster.
The other features will come. Why would MS want to make a bad product. A good product results in another license of Windows. That's all they care about.
and scratt, if you are saying the fact that MS doesn't have significant technological advantages over Connectix in development of VPC than you really are a fool.
even as an insult you're get a life comment makes no sense. congratulations, you are a failure in all aspects of your post.
and scratt, if you are saying the fact that MS doesn't have significant technological advantages over Connectix in development of VPC than you really are a fool.
24 hours and that's the best retort you could come up with! :lol:
If you resort to insults you are the one who has already lost my friend.
You have not answered one of my points. The simple fact is you cannot. That is plain to see from your own post.
And as for your footnote! I think people have already pointed out in this thread that a straight port is a dissapointing outcome for VPC after a year. I would like to know what you are basing your 'technological' comments on. Have you actually used this new technological marvel from M$? Because I have, and it is dissapointing. You are in the minority with your viewpoint. I suggest you pop back to M$ and hang out with your friends there... Oh and change your handle. I suggest you trim Apple from it and it will make much more sense to everyone! :D
Cheers,
scratt
applenut
2004-09-16, 22:23
24 hours and that's the best retort you could come up with! :lol:
If you resort to insults you are the one who has already lost my friend.
You have not answered one of my points. The simple fact is you cannot. That is plain to see from your own post.
And as for your footnote! I think people have already pointed out in this thread that a straight port is a dissapointing outcome for VPC after a year. I would like to know what you are basing your 'technological' comments on. Have you actually used this new technological marvel from M$? Because I have, and it is dissapointing. You are in the minority with your viewpoint. I suggest you pop back to M$ and hang out with your friends there... Oh and change your handle. I suggest you trim Apple from it and it will make much more sense to everyone! :D
Cheers,
scratt
what points? you have none. you resorted to insults and continue to do so because you're weak.
24 hours? try the only free hour during a 24 hour period. aka I have a life and you don't and therefore sit around here wasting your life away.
technological advantage? oh hm....i don't know....maybe having the codebase for the operating system you are running in emulation.
quit being a dipshit. and that little spiel about anti-MS and changing my handle. grow up. this fanboi shit is old and tired. i haven''t seen you make a good argument anywhere on this board yet.
now back to my life.
kscherer
2004-09-17, 00:10
. . . Why would MS want to make a bad product . . .
:confused: Can anyone say XP? :lol:
kscherer
2004-09-17, 00:15
VPC provides an integration with the Mac that a stand alone PC box will not provide. With Virtual PC i can copy and paste between PC and Mac. I can switch instantly to the PC, make a change, save it to my desktop....work on it in a mac application and vice versa.
Applenut,
This is merely a question, not a criticism:
What Apps do you use on a PC that are not available for the Mac, from which you need to copy and paste? Please don't tell me Office, or Photoshop.
I am sure that our professions are very much different, but I have been putting off VPC7 (even though I can get it beyond dirt-cheap), because there is no PC software that I NEED, that I cannot get for my Mac, or do not already have. :)
You are also NOT allowed to include "Typing Tutor" or "Ultimate, I-have-way-too-much-time House Plan creator."
:confused: Can anyone say XP? :lol::no: Come on, folks. Let's not bring up the old childish, tired, and dead arguments about "wah wah M$ Windoze suxxx". We've all heard them before.
At least try to stay on the topic of VPC.
kscherer
2004-09-17, 00:18
:no: Come on, folks. Let's not bring up the old childish, tired, and dead arguments about "wah wah M$ Windoze suxxx". We've all heard them before.
At least try to stay on the topic of VPC.
Me mucho apologies, Brad. :( Sorry to contaminate the thread with toxic waste.
kscherer
2004-09-17, 00:22
Even though I am not a VPC supporter, I would like to give it one bit of Kudos:
I once read (PC World, many moons ago) that the most stable platform to run Win 95 was a Powermac G4 running VPC. If memory serves ( :\ ) recent tests seem to indicate the same for VPC6. Perhaps the same will hold true ov V.7?
VPC provides an integration with the Mac that a stand alone PC box will not provide. With Virtual PC i can copy and paste between PC and Mac. I can switch instantly to the PC, make a change, save it to my desktop....work on it in a mac application and vice versa.
VPC has many uses that are worth the price.
That's a valid point, applenut. Switching back and forth between my PowerBook and my Wintel box is still sub-optimal. I can live with that because I rarely use my Wintel box and it was free. But if I had to use both for work, an integrated solution like VPC on a DP G5 -- assuming it is fast enough -- might be a more efficient setup.
And now that it is on the G5 It's likely much faster. (emphasis added)
Note the emphasis I added, however. We still don't know (by personal experience) how much faster, if faster at all, VPC will be on a DP G5.
The bottom line is that VPC is the ideal tool for certain situations. You certainly can't beat the portability of VPC on a PowerBook. And once Apple can manage to ship a PowerBook G5, power/speed will possibly no longer be a concern. On the other hand, somebody doing web development and simply using a PC to check browser compatibility -- or somebody using heavy Windows-only apps, e.g. AutoCAD or ColdFusion -- might be better off with a separate Wintel box at the other end of their desk. As so often, it all depends... ;)
Escher
alcimedes
2004-09-17, 09:05
well, the real bitch of it is they cut out two of the most important features to make VPC fast enough to actually be usable.
3D card access (as in not crappy emulation) and the ability to offload background processes in VPC to the second processor.
the 3D card is the more important of the two, as it would make a difference on any machine. the second processor bit would be really nice for those running DP machines.
basically this means that programs like AutoCAD, ColdFusion aren't ready to be used in a VPC enviornment. whereas if just those two functions were added to VPC, it would be a completely different ball game.
(not to mention games won't work, STILL, which sucks balls)
well, the real bitch of it is they cut out two of the most important features to make VPC fast enough to actually be usable.
3D card access (as in not crappy emulation) and the ability to offload background processes in VPC to the second processor.
the 3D card is the more important of the two, as it would make a difference on any machine. the second processor bit would be really nice for those running DP machines.
basically this means that programs like AutoCAD, ColdFusion aren't ready to be used in a VPC enviornment. whereas if just those two functions were added to VPC, it would be a completely different ball game.
(not to mention games won't work, STILL, which sucks balls)
Absolutely.
It is farcical to my mind that they are even bothering to release it.
I think the fact that they are means it is going to be a long time before we see any of those extra features.
Personally I think M$ is in such a funk over the XP debacle and the 'Longhaul' mess that things like this are a long way down the list....
Time will only tell.
kscherer
2004-09-17, 10:32
Personally I think M$ is in such a funk over the XP debacle and the 'Longhaul' mess that things like this are a long way down the list....
Do you think the MBU is affected by Longhaul? I would think they are somewhat independant of that mess. Sure, financial resources might be diverted, but I cannot see Microhard moving the MBU team over to write for the PC side. That would be counter productive to both teams. However, is it more likely that Microhard simply manages with something akin to the Nazi war machine: Soldiers in the field are not allowed to make decisions without first consulting with a superior officer, who must consult with a superior officer, who must consult . . . who is sipping mai thais in Jamaica? :confused:
Personally I think M$ is in such a funk over the XP debacle and the 'Longhaul' mess that things like this are a long way down the list....
You have no idea about MS's company structure, or the structure of companies that size in general. Even with Apple, which is quite a bit smaller, one product team usually doesn't affect another at all.
Most of the MacBU is not even in Redmond, but in Silicon Valley.
:confused: Can anyone say XP? :lol:
Uncalled for. In a network, at least, XP is a decent stable, massively configurable OS and a good successor of 2000. (I love, use and prefer Macs, but I also don't mind being a Windows 2000 Server admin)
applenut
2004-09-17, 11:45
Applenut,
This is merely a question, not a criticism:
What Apps do you use on a PC that are not available for the Mac, from which you need to copy and paste? Please don't tell me Office, or Photoshop.
I am sure that our professions are very much different, but I have been putting off VPC7 (even though I can get it beyond dirt-cheap), because there is no PC software that I NEED, that I cannot get for my Mac, or do not already have. :)
You are also NOT allowed to include "Typing Tutor" or "Ultimate, I-have-way-too-much-time House Plan creator."
personally I don't use VPC all that much. I have a copy of VPC 6 for my Powerbook for the random PC software I'll be required to use for school or some files that friends will send me that my mac can't open/read correctly. It has also come in handy interfacing with some PC only devices and will in the future. So for me, it suits my needs quite well although it runs extremely slow on my 667 Powerbook
Clearly there are people who need VPC and use it as I described. No, not for office and photoshop but I know there are other areas where it is useful and needed.
Although, I remember VPC running much better back in 1998 on the 292 Mhz Wallstreet powerbooks at MWNY. They had a couple machines set up with VPC running fullscreen with W95 and it was usuable and actually impressive. since then despite faster machines it has seemed to crawl. I guess XP is also to blame for that.
You have no idea about MS's company structure, or the structure of companies that size in general. Even with Apple, which is quite a bit smaller, one product team usually doesn't affect another at all.
Most of the MacBU is not even in Redmond, but in Silicon Valley.
Uncalled for. In a network, at least, XP is a decent stable, massively configurable OS and a good successor of 2000. (I love, use and prefer Macs, but I also don't mind being a Windows 2000 Server admin)
chucker,
I hate to disagree but I am afraid I do. I was senior software engineer for both Virtuality PLC in the UK, Spacial Sound Placement development advisor for NASA and Head of software developement for SEGA Enterprises Japan R&D Division #4 (Arcade) in my time... and I am missing some out. So yes I do have an idea about large corporate structure and internal politics.
My references to Redmond were anecdotal and not factual.
With regard to XP... if that is the only thing it can do... and I have my own personal doubts... it is a poor show for what was touted as the next great OS for ALL PCs.
:lol:
I guess XP is also to blame for that.
It's pretty slow with '98 too! :D
Although, I remember VPC running much better back in 1998 on the 292 Mhz Wallstreet powerbooks at MWNY. They had a couple machines set up with VPC running fullscreen with W95 and it was usuable and actually impressive. since then despite faster machines it has seemed to crawl. I guess XP is also to blame for that.
From what I understand, most regular VPC users agree that running W2K instead of XP improves responsiveness, speed, and usability. Of course, right now, MS is only selling VPC 7 with XP, while the standalone VPC and the versions with other OS's have to wait.
Escher
applenut
2004-09-17, 12:44
It's pretty slow with '98 too! :D
ME is the worst :D
ME is the worst :D
Good grief! I had forgotton about that one! :lol:
From what I understand, most regular VPC users agree that running W2K instead of XP improves responsiveness, speed, and usability. Of course, right now, MS is only selling VPC 7 with XP, while the standalone VPC and the versions with other OS's have to wait.
I had heard that too... Unfortunately I don't have a copy and have persevered with 98.
As for the XP bundling thing..a blinding marketting decision! :lol:
You know you have to wonder if that somewhere someone is trying to knobble VPC.. Just a bit!! :confused:
kscherer
2004-09-17, 13:06
personally I don't use VPC all that much. I have a copy of VPC 6 for my Powerbook for the random PC software I'll be required to use for school or some files that friends will send me that my mac can't open/read correctly. It has also come in handy interfacing with some PC only devices and will in the future. So for me, it suits my needs quite well although it runs extremely slow on my 667 Powerbook
Clearly there are people who need VPC and use it as I described. No, not for office and photoshop but I know there are other areas where it is useful and needed.
Although, I remember VPC running much better back in 1998 on the 292 Mhz Wallstreet powerbooks at MWNY. They had a couple machines set up with VPC running fullscreen with W95 and it was usuable and actually impressive. since then despite faster machines it has seemed to crawl. I guess XP is also to blame for that.
Thanks for the feedback. I think, however, that as time goes by, we will find less and less uses for VPC. I can understand school (most of them haven't caught on yet) and the ocasional file. But PC device manufacturers are slowly including the Mac in their driver packages. Hell, I thought National Geographic would NEVER release their USGS map-on-a-CD series for the Mac, but that has changed with OS X and others (even vaunted GPS manufacturers) are getting on board. Perhaps they finally believe that Apple has an OS that not only has legs, but is easier to port to.
Thanks for the feedback. I think, however, that as time goes by, we will find less and less uses for VPC. I can understand school (most of them haven't caught on yet) and the ocasional file. But PC device manufacturers are slowly including the Mac in their driver packages. Hell, I thought National Geographic would NEVER release their USGS map-on-a-CD series for the Mac, but that has changed with OS X and others (even vaunted GPS manufacturers) are getting on board. Perhaps they finally believe that Apple has an OS that not only has legs, but is easier to port to.
Pretty good point actually.
A year ago I was probably firing VPC up once a week. Mainly to access a particular online banking system that would not work with any Mac browsers...
More recently I use it more as a vanity item.
Once or twice a month to update a menu system which I use for a couple of web sites which is created using a piece of PC specific software. If I wasn't so tight fisted I could probably do away with that and by a Mac one for a few $$s!
The only other use was to try out skype before they brought out the Mac version.... and occasionally for a SUUNTO watch downloader...
None of these are earth shattering uses of the technology and I probably wouldn't really notice the loss if I didn't use it any more...
I think a lot of the fascination with VPC is the novelty value that a Mac could actually do the VPC thing itself. I will certainly try to keep my version of VPC up to date and fire it up from time to time... Why I don't know but I really cannot justify the money it costs! :\
kscherer
2004-09-17, 13:42
And what about virus protection when running VPC7 with XP? Has the MBU done anything about that?
You'd think with their first opportunity to sell Windows to Mac users, MS would've made an effort to make the thing bullet-proof. They still sell a copy of their OS, so WTF. Why not make it rock so every Mac user wants a copy? Then they really can say every computer in the universe has a copy of Windows on it; you'd think that would give Ballmer a hard-on, but I guess not.
Messiahtosh
2004-09-17, 14:52
You'd think with their first opportunity to sell Windows to Mac users, MS would've made an effort to make the thing bullet-proof. They still sell a copy of their OS, so WTF. Why not make it rock so every Mac user wants a copy? Then they really can say every computer in the universe has a copy of Windows on it; you'd think that would give Ballmer a hard-on, but I guess not. :lol:
kscherer
2004-09-17, 16:11
Here is something to think about:
What if you could run VPC3.0 w/Win95 for Mac OS 9, running in the Classic Mode! :eek:
And what about virus protection when running VPC7 with XP? Has the MBU done anything about that?
Isn't it shipping with XP and SP2? Don't you know that fixed all the security holes in XP. So it is impregnable. You can throw your Virus Software away! :lol:
Windows XP is a virus. :D
Windows XP is a virus. :D
Hey. That is damn clever! So it is totally protected. A Virus cannot catch a Virus! :lol:
And what about virus protection when running VPC7 with XP? Has the MBU done anything about that?What about it? Why should they?
Getting a virus in a Windows installation on VPC is just as easy as getting a virus in a Windows installation on VPC. Why should it be any different?
Or are you worried that a virus inside of a self-contained environment such as VPC could somehow get out and start mangling your Mac? Unless you have your regular files shared as a virtual drive in the VPC environment, there's nothing at all a virus can do (outside of the virtual PC's hard drive file).
Thanx for bring us back on to topic!
I think that is a concern. We are all kind of sitting pretty at the moment in the Mac world without any serious virus concerns.. but I don't think it will last forever. My main uses for VPC at the moment are for testing web design issues... As such I often have a shared virtual drive connecting my Mac to the PC environment and I am actively connected to the Internet from both the PC and the Mac.
Email viruses are not an issue as I don't use any mail apps. in VPC, but the kind of 'viruses' we have been seeing recently which involve exploiting system help software and wbe page design are a concern...
I haven't actually tried to use any kind of Virus software in VPC. I am sure I read, or perhaps I presumed, that their are issues with that kind of app. in VPC..
I haven't actually tried to use any kind of Virus software in VPC. I am sure I read, or perhaps I presumed, that their are issues with that kind of app. in VPC..Nope.
Again, why think of VPC as any different from a PC? For all intents and purposes, as far as software goes, it is seen just the same as a slow PC.
Just like in a real PC, the drive in VPC can become fragmented. Just like in a real PC, you should perform routine maintenance from within VPC to make sure everything is running smoothly. Just like in a real PC, when you connect VPC to a LAN, its copy of Windows may be open to certain attacks. Just like in a real PC, you should use antivirus software from within VPC if you have any suspicion that it could be at risk.
Damn!
Does that mean that just like in a real PC Norton sucks too!! :D
alcimedes
2004-09-18, 09:58
or you just leave all the files you work on on the Mac HD, and don't save any system changes in the drive.
"After two days of VPC 7, I had to revert to version 6. I have 98, 2000, and XP Pro. XP Pro would literally take forever to load on 7, 98 was okay. I agree with the comments about 2000. In my opinion, it is not yet showtime for version 7. If you rely on VPC to get something done, hang on with 6 until MS tweaks the 7. Tested mine on G4 and iMac G5 but not on dual"
"I got VPC 7 today. It's going back tomorrow. What a waste of an afternoon. I'm running a brand spanking new G5, so had hoped this thing would work on it. Wrong. It wouldn't even install - died on installing the OS every time. And generally in new and different ways. If I had wanted to spend that much time looking at Windows error messages I'd have kept the PC. Now, I have 2 other Macs I could have tried it on, not G5s, but you know...I've just about had it. Save your money. If you have an older machine, run VPC6.1 using 98. That would be fairly reasonable."
"Here are preliminary search results - all systems running OS X and Win98 SE
VP 7 - 2.5 G5 - 11 sec.
VP 6 - 1.0 Dual G4 - 18 sec.
VP 6 - 450 dual G4 - 42 sec."
"Well, I got my copy of Office 2004 Pro with VPC 7 (XP Pro) from Amazon and while the Office upgrade installed on top of my existing version without any problems, VPC has been a headache. The initial installation was a bit rocky and once I got it up and running the larger problems started when I installed a new mouse driver for my MS trackball mouse. I couldn't sign into Windows and when I finally sorted that issue out, the mouse wasn't responding. I called MS tech support for VPC 7 and was told to call back another day, they were too busy. So, I then uninstalled XP Pro and reinstalled it, but the problems with the mouse persisted. I finally went into safe mode and went to the original system restore point to get XP running again."
Just some of many basically negative quotes from 'the other place' about VPC7.
"I have XP running on a beta of VPC7, and it is much slower than 2000, which I had prior to XP. Stick with 2000"
"Quite honestly, I think MS handcuffed this on purpose. I have run virtual machines on UNIX and Linux before and did not see much of a performance hit. "
What a suprise!!!
:lol:
DMBand0026
2004-10-02, 10:06
What? You actually expected VPC to be good? MS can't write a good OS, let alone an emulator :\
"I have XP running on a beta of VPC7, and it is much slower than 2000, which I had prior to XP. Stick with 2000"
"Quite honestly, I think MS handcuffed this on purpose. I have run virtual machines on UNIX and Linux before and did not see much of a performance hit. "
What a suprise!!!
:lol:While I can understand the jabs at Microsoft, these last two complaints have nothing to do with problems in VPC7. With the first, of course XP will run slower than 2000. It does on a real PC; so, it also will on VPC of any version, not just VPC7. Regarding the second complaint, the virtual machines mentioned are nothing like VPC. Those VMs are much more like the Classic environment on Mac OS X. They don't have to emulate a whole different processor architecture; they just translate specific procedure calls.
Fair enough...
I think the real gist of this thread is this...
"From what I've been reading, there isn't a great speed improvement to V7, only G5 support. The consensus is that most people are disappointed for waiting this long, paying that much money for an upgrade and getting virtually (no pun intended) no speed increase.."
wiskedjak
2004-10-03, 09:16
VPC provides an integration with the Mac that a stand alone PC box will not provide. With Virtual PC i can copy and paste between PC and Mac. I can switch instantly to the PC, make a change, save it to my desktop....work on it in a mac application and vice versa.
Remote Desktop Connection offers this integration. Plus, you don't get the RAM and CPU limitations of VPC
BarracksSi
2004-10-03, 09:49
I still think that Microsoft bought VPC to kill it.
I still think that Microsoft bought VPC to kill it.Unless you've got some awfully good reasoning, this assertion makes no sense at all from a realistic business stance.
Having Virtual PC or any x86 emulator an the market is good for Microsoft. Why? It makes them money. Microsoft doesn't care about the hardware that Windows is running on. As long as it contributes to the sale of more Windows licenses, emulated environments will help (albeit in a relatively small way) Microsoft's bank notes. It would be phenomenally stupid to just cut off a flow of cash like this. We all know Microsoft like money, right?
On top of that, keep in mind that Microsoft did not buy Virtual PC solely for the Mac version, but for the Windows version. You didn't forget there was a Windows version, did you? Yes, the Windows version of Virtual PC allows system administrators to run several versions of Windows and other operating systems on the same box. With the quick press of a key, Admin Arnold can switch from his Windows XP install over to his Windows Longhorn VM to test his software before rolling out the official update. Admin Agnes can run mission-critical software that only works in Windows 9x while still being able to switch to Windows XP for other software.
Ever heard of VMWare? VPC does essentially the same thing. Guess what that means? More sales and money for Microsoft! Fight the competition with a product emblazoned by the mothership's very own logo.
Integrating Virtual PC into Windows itself was the primary reason for buying it. It brings a great boon to Windows server administrators who would like to run several versions of Windows (of just different configs of the same version) without having to manage many different physical boxes. Also, keep in mind that VPC for Windows is much faster than VPC for Mac because it doesn't have to go through the massive speed hit from instruction translations.
But Brad they are never going to put their full effort into VPC on the Mac, and certainly no where near the effort another company might. And because of that it is now definitely owned by the worst possible masters.
M$ may not have bought it to knobble it, but the effect is the same. It will never reach it's full potential. They certainly didn't want it getting any better and being in the hands of another party, if they could possibly have complete oversight... for obvious reasons.
Back in the real world and the actual effect on the street how the hell can they justify that they have done nothing with it for the past year? This latest release is a shameful excuse for a revision. It is certainly not worthy of a +1 version number. It is still VPC 6, just ported to the G5 processor.
BarracksSi
2004-10-03, 12:03
Imagine a Gateway salesperson saying, "Well, yes, you can run Virtual PC on a Mac, but it runs really poorly, and doesn't even do this & this... why not buy one of our PCs with genuine Windows already installed?"
Customer: "Well, can't Microsoft write a better Virtual PC?"
FUD-spreading salesperson: "They could if the Mac OS was easier and more 'standardized' to make software development easier. I'd recommend buying one with Windows as its native OS just to make things easier on yourself."
FUD-eating customer: "Ok, well, I'll take that one over there, then."
wiskedjak
2004-10-03, 13:31
But Brad they are never going to put their full effort into VPC on the Mac, and certainly no where near the effort another company might. And because of that it is now definitely owned by the worst possible masters
A fraction of M$'s full effort is likely 10x the amount of effort Connectix could muster.
applenut
2004-10-03, 17:15
you guys sound like the never been laid fags that are always behind me on line at Macworld and crap. get over this MS is out to crush me thing....it's pathetic
you guys sound like the never been laid fags that are always behind me on line at Macworld and crap. get over this MS is out to crush me thing....it's patheticFor once, I actually agree with applenut. :)
Microsoft has much greater resources at its disposal for improving VPC than Connectix ever had. Will they be used? That's still to be seen.
Anyone bashing Microsoft for its development or lack thereof regarding VPC obviously hasn't followed the shoddy history of Connectix's own management of VPC. Between the updates that made VPC slower and the pay-for updates that either added practically no extra features of were just to make up for the idiotic previous releases, I don't think anyone should be giving Connectix positive credit while complaining about Microsoft.
Has anyone here written a hardware emulator before? Do any of you have any idea how incredibly complex that can be, especially when dealing on the level of the x86 architecture? Do you realize that a major feature of the G4 processor that is necessary for much of VPC's work is completely missing from the G5? I think Microsoft should get a lot of praise simply for getting VPC running on the G5.
applenut
2004-10-03, 17:34
For once, I actually agree with applenut. :)
phew....when i saw you responded and clicked i was anticipating another ban or something :smokey:
alcimedes
2004-10-03, 18:00
i knew there was a reason, we talked about it at some meeting, and it had nothing to do with the Mac version of VPC.
Execs from Microsoft’s Macintosh Business unit are being very careful to reassure Mac users that Virtual PC has a future. But Microsoft didn’t buy the Virtual PC line for the Mac product – they bought it for Virtual Server, which will presumably be productized as a feature of some future version of Windows Server.
Virtual Server allows one copy of Windows Server to host many virtual servers. These virtual servers each get their own operating system, including legacy operating systems like Windows NT (30 percent of Windows server customers are still using the 6-year-old OS) and – from Microsoft’s point-of-view – Linux. The important thing about all of this is that Virtual Server allows customers to migrate to the forthcoming Windows XP Server, since Virtual Server essentially makes OS compatibility a non-issue.
read the rest here (http://playbacktime.com/archives/2003/02/19/why-microsoft-bought-virtual-pc/).
edit: i would think that they'll put the same time/effort into VPC that they put into Office. sure, it's not a huge market for them, but they actually keep it on par with the Windows versions of Office. i expect MS will move the Mac version of VPC forward faster/better than Connectix did.
Does anyone know how VPC works on the G5? Does it byte flip using the integer ALUs or Altivec's rather nice vector permute? Something else?
i knew there was a reason, we talked about it at some meeting, and it had nothing to do with the Mac version of VPC.
read the rest here (http://playbacktime.com/archives/2003/02/19/why-microsoft-bought-virtual-pc/).Ding ding ding ding!!
This completely confirms my post at the bottom of the previous page. :)
A fraction of M$'s full effort is likely 10x the amount of effort Connectix could muster.
That's obviously why VPC6 (developed by Connectix) is almost identical to VPC7 (under M$ for a year or more since buying it from Connectix).
Hmmm.. yeah sorry... how stupid of me you are right!
(p.s. That was sarcasm) :no:
you guys sound like the never been laid fags that are always behind me on line at Macworld and crap. get over this MS is out to crush me thing....it's pathetic
Those who can't debate resort to insults.
And Brad - shame on you.
Those who can't debate resort to insults.And those who can't debate resort to picking apart the opponent's semantics and ignoring the meat of the argument! :lol:
Don't worry; I've been thoroughly scolded.
http://www.monkeyview.net/id/538/default/shame.jpg
applenut
2004-10-04, 04:27
weak.
Oh! It stings, it burns. The cutting comments. I can't take it anymore!
:lol:
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.