virtual pc for carbon

**monty** · January 12th, 2001, 10:51 AM

Whenever I double clicked on an expandable drive - VPC loaded and did the usual.

jove,

i meant that in VPC 3 when you double click on a drive icon in the finder it mounted in the FINDER. just like a regular disk image. I heard that because Connectix change their images so that they are now expandable, and propriety, finder can't mount them.

Note: you can quote by pressing the icon of the page with the red arrow of the post you want to quote. or you can just surround the quote with [ QUOTE ] [ /QUOTE ].
(without the internal spaces)

to see a list of the other vB codes click the vB link at the bottom of the page.

peter

**tsenecal** · January 31st, 2001, 09:33 AM

hello people...

i am currently working on the carbon version of a really lame pc emulator called macbochs (lame because it is slow, and has very limited functionality). in its non-mac form, it is written by a guy named Kevin Lawton, and the original port of macbochs is by a guy named david batterham. I have taken david's code and basically recompiled it under carbon. I am in the process of adding more funcitonality than what david's port currently has, and one of the coolest things is to use aqua's alpha channel so that the color of the desktop is rendered as a 100% transparent color. this way, if someone were to set the windows "screen" size to the same size as the macintosh "screen" size, choose an arbitrarily distinct color for the windows desktop (background) and then activate the tranparency effect, you would get basically the exact same effect that classic gives to pre carbonized mac apps. the only flaw (or fly) in the ointment is that macbochs doesn't support anything but vga graphics (640x480 max). virtual PC doesn't have this limitation. windows also allows you to configure where the start menu resides, it just so happens that it defaults to the bottom, but it can be placed on the right, or left, or top if you want...

the rest of the stuff remains exactly as it is now, so that the user has a visual context switch..... windows windows look like windows windows carbon/cocoa look like aqua, and classic look like platinum.

**MacFreak** · January 31st, 2001, 05:25 PM

Someone told me that Apple is working on classic merger into MacOS X. We can open any application on MacOS X without having to start up Classic all the time. Is that true?

**VGZ** · January 31st, 2001, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by MacFreak
Someone told me that Apple is working on classic merger into MacOS X. We can open any application on MacOS X without having to start up Classic all the time. Is that true?

That would be nice. Where did youhere about this?

**strobe** · February 1st, 2001, 07:13 AM

Originally posted by MacFreak
Someone told me that Apple is working on classic merger into MacOS X. We can open any application on MacOS X without having to start up Classic all the time. Is that true?

I can only think of one way to do that, and it would be a real hack job which would break tons of stuff. It would also waste tons of development manhours which would be better used elsewhere since Classic already works well enough.

Now another possibility is to use a disk image like VirtualPC does so the disk image cannot be tampered with, the other volumes would be mounted as network drives. This would allow one to save the Classic RAM state like one can in VirtualPC, however it has severe drawbacks like disk access speed. I would bet $50k Apple will not do this.

Something more likely is caching the startup sequence like StartupDoubler does.

**jove** · February 1st, 2001, 07:58 PM

Hello

I just started a new job where we use ReflectionX on NT. Our HP UNIX servers control the NT XWindows client. I know the technology is VERY different from VPC but the UI issues are similar.

The aforementioned idea of a transparent desktop works - ReflectionX has that option. The XWindow "Dock" sits on top of the Windows taskbar. They are both visually static items. The MacOSX dock is not exactly static :->

My personal experience, so far, says the fears of mode switching (i.e. copy command differences) are unfounded. The appearance of the XWindow is clue enough to tell me what change of gestures are needed. I do not see the difference between selecting a single foreign OS window or the entire foreign OS's emulation window. Either way there are visual and gesture changes.

Somebody mentioned they wouldn't want thier Grandmother to use a system with different OS windows inter-mingling. And the same end-user won't have a problem switching from the current VPC and back?

Jove

[Edited by jove on 02-01-2001 at 08:02 PM]

**monty** · February 3rd, 2001, 10:52 PM

>Somebody mentioned they wouldn't want thier
>Grandmother to use a system with different OS
>windows inter-mingling. And the same end-user won't
>have a problem switching from the current VPC and
>back?

Good Point.

Basically, from what everyone is saying on this post it is technically possible to get VPC working like Classic does. Come on Connectix!

peter

**strobe** · February 7th, 2001, 11:23 AM

I didn't write the grandmother comment, but it's true to say that switching to VPC within a window is a lot easier than switching to Xtools which I no longer use. The reason is it's more overtly a non-mac environment when I switch to that window. It has a task bar, it has a different background with a different desktop, etc.

Connectix would be better off implementing a windows-side OpenGL driver which uses the OS X driver.