Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Enthusiast Zone > Classic Macs and Mac OS > Virtual PC w/ WIN 98 v. WiN 2K

Virtual PC w/ WIN 98 v. WiN 2K
Thread Tools
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2001, 03:27 PM
 
Anyone here have Virtual PC under OS 9 or X? I have Virtual PC 4.0 under OS 9. I am running Win98 and wondering if anyone has run Win 2K. Is it more stable under VPC 4.0 than Win98?
==========================
In all things, Moderation.
==========================
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2001, 04:37 PM
 
Win 2000 is definitely more stable than Win 98, under (OS 9) VPC 4 (or any real computer for that matter). In (OS X) VPC 4.1 Win 2000 is unusably slow on a G3 however, but then again Win 98 is pretty slow too.

Hopefully you have a fast G4 and lots of memory.
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Halsey, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2001, 04:45 PM
 
I've used VPC 4 in both OS9 and X with both Win 98 and 2k, and my experience is that Win 2k is both more stable and slightly faster than 98. I haven't noticed a big speed penalty running is OSX - my guess is having 768M RAM makes up for the difference. I'm using a Pismo 400. The biggest problem with VPC under OSX is the things it's still missing, like USB support...
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2001, 06:00 PM
 
Originally posted by Davidarm:
<STRONG>I've used VPC 4 in both OS9 and X with both Win 98 and 2k, and my experience is that Win 2k is both more stable and slightly faster than 98. I haven't noticed a big speed penalty running is OSX - my guess is having 768M RAM makes up for the difference. I'm using a Pismo 400. The biggest problem with VPC under OSX is the things it's still missing, like USB support...</STRONG>
Yeah, I guess I should have specified that I'm running an iBook 600 with 384 RAM. That doesn't give me much breathing room in OS X, esp since Win 2000 is a memory hog when compared to WIn 98.

I also got the impression that a fixed drive size may slightly increase speed, but that's only an unconfirmed impression at this point, it eats space obviously.

I wish I had justification to upgrade to 640 RAM, but 512 MB SODIMMS are still relatively pricey. I wish the iBook had another slot.
     
   
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:45 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2