virtual pc for carbon

[flaggrrl]

does anyone know anything about development of virtual pc of carbon? i've been having a lot of problems with classic (it doesn't work!), but even if i got it working, it seems so slow that i cringe to think about running virtual pc on it.

[Stefan]

Y ask me the same.

[macboy73]

i mailed connectix with this very issue: 'unfortunately it is not carbonized' even with version 4. bunch of idiots.

[jove]

Those \"bunch of idiots\" are creating a version of VPC that will theorietically run similar to Classic in X. Imagine no more virtual monitor in a window!

In VPC4 you can execute multiple OS environments at once, i.e. Linux in one window, and Windows in another. Now imagine that architecture without the current window confines. We should be able to layer and work with docs and apps from various OSs at once in the same \"screen\"!

Yeah, bunch of idiots.

[macboy73]

That\'s even worse than not having it carbonized. How the hell are you supposed to tell you windows apart in three different OSs. And how are you supposed to do configuration of the Operating System? Classic does not have such a problem because you can get at control panels and usch on the hard disk. With Virtual PC using disk images, you cannot do this, based on what you have said. That is a system that makes no sense!

[jove]

How is this any different than Classic in X?

Classic windows are Platinum, not Aqua. Similarly, and this is all conjecture, that Win32 windows will look like, well, M$ Windows.

Classic in X consists of two applications - the Classic App and TrueBlue. The Classic App has facilities to customize the emulation and TrueBlue, the emulator, gives access to the native control panels. Why can\'t VPC do something similar? They already are.

Connectix may decide not to create the fabled \"red box\" as I suggested. The only real issues are UI. Where does the \"Start Menu\" go or does it support Window\'s desktop pictures, and etc? If connective can figure out a reasonable solution to the task bar - then the user can access the control panels.

>With Virtual PC using disk images
Disk images, under X, will not limit functionality. It will behave no differently than the Sys9 partition most users have.

When all said and done - VPC may still sit in an emulator window. I believe X offers enough support where this is unnecessary.

Have you actually carbonized an application? Most high level apps are fairly easy. VPC does not run on that level. To gain the speed it needs, it most likely bypasses the now supported Carbon APIs. Carbonizing a tool like VPC is a major undertaking. They plan, like most companies, to ship native when X becomes final. Even Intuit is denying that Quicken 2001 is carbonized. Many companies do not want to support products for a beta OS.

VPC for X may even not be Carbon (speed reasons). If not, then it is a total rewrite. Calling the talented engineers at Connective idiots is, well, idiotic; especially when neither you nor I have any idea what the code looks like.

[macboy73]

Your notes about the start menu and such are exactly what i mean. You are not able to launch applications with disks set up the way that Virtual PC is set up now. You cannot mount the disk image, and therefore cannot double click an application in the Mac OS to open it. For this reason, you must have a desktop visible or a file browser of some sort. I retract my claims of these guys being idiots. I have nothing against this type of system, but this is a bit of a problem that needs to be worked out. If you can\'t launch applications, what\'s the point?

[jove]

You can launch Classic Apps, why not VPC apps? X, for better or worse, understands extensions. Double clicking an exe file on an Mac mounted volume can launch VPC. I beleive that happens now in 9 via File Exchange and Apple Events.