Virtual PC 5.0 SPEED !

F

frank212

Registered
Hi!

I just managed to get a copy of Virtual PC 5.0. and Windows 98 I have an iBook 600 with 384 mg of ram. It is soooooo slow! Honestly not useable!

I used Virtual PC 3.0 before and you could at least browse. Any suggestions to speed it up a little? I also downloaded the update to 5.01 already.

Thank you all for your help!
ciao
Frank
 
You're using VPC under OS X? if this is the case, yes it is slow - switch to OS 9 and feel the difference in speed! I've installed NT4 Workstation with service pack 5 and its darn faster than Win98 could ever be, so you could try changing OS's. OS 9 allows VPC to "hog" all cpu time, well most of it, whereas in OSX you have pre-emptive multitasking thus taking a hit on performance.
 
increasing the process priority of VPC helps a bit (while slowing down the rest of the system) but not much. VPC under OS X is miles away from beeing usable when you install a windows-based OS. I suggest switching to OS 9 or run some kind of Linux...
 
I gave up using it in OSX, just too much finger drumming (on the table goddammit!:eek: )!

Apparently quiting cpu intensive apps when running VPC5 helps (iTunes etc.)
 
If I absolutely have to use it (which rarely happens), I quit most other apps and renice VPC to -20. I also have allocated 256MB of RAM to it, to run Win2k (got 768MB total on my iMac).
But it's still painfully slooooooowww....
 
Macwindows has a fairly comprehensive dossier on VPC for OSX. INterestingly, Connectix claim that renicing VPC doesn't actually make any difference.....
 
VPC is soooooooo slooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

frank211122112121121211221121221111212211212211221122121212122112211,

you're completely right!

AppleWatcher
 
Originally posted by tismey
Macwindows has a fairly comprehensive dossier on VPC for OSX. INterestingly, Connectix claim that renicing VPC doesn't actually make any difference.....
Click to expand...

damnit...than it was just imagination or wishfull thinking from me that the renice helped...which makes things even worse.
 
The only environment I have a bench mark utility in is NEXTSTEP 3.3. In VPC5 running under Mac OS 9 I get 3.8375, but under Mac OS X I get 1.4243. I would say that is quite a difference if you ask me.

:rolleyes:
 
I was using Nicer in Mac OS X, but without the score dropped to 1.3468, not that big a difference considering the difference between Mac OS X (either way) and Mac OS 9.

For the things I need quickly, VPC5 in Mac OS X is fine. For everything else, I'll be back in Mac OS 9 (and I'll play some game while I'm there :D ).
 
I have red a very interesting thing in the connectix forum back in the "test drive" days which discussed the idea of porting at least the display layer of VPC to Quartz. The guys from Connectix said that this would help and would take away some weight which now lasts on the code, and that they are considering to do this...

I am trying to find that thread, it was very interesting...I'll report back when I found it
 
I too have given up on VPC 5 in OSX. However, SoftWindows runs (in Classic mode) and is just as fast as it ever was.

Can anyone explain that?

Shame they've stopped making it....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top