Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

eyes on me · Dec 26, 2003, 03:02 AM

Im new to macintosh and I want to download stuff that I can't dl on macintosh. Some suggest using VPC, but I have no clue what I should pick. I have ibook G4 Mac OS X version 10.3, 933 MHz and 256 Mb. (will it run fast?) Please respond Thank You

Busemann · Dec 26, 2003, 08:25 AM

Originally posted by eyes on me:
Im new to macintosh and I want to download stuff that I can't dl on macintosh. Some suggest using VPC, but I have no clue what I should pick. I have ibook G4 Mac OS X version 10.3, 933 MHz and 256 Mb. (will it run fast?) Please respond Thank You

There is only version 6.1 that you can get.. It will run reasonably fast, but it will certainly not be useable for any demanding stuff like games etc.

btw. what is it that you must download on windows?

chabig · Dec 26, 2003, 09:13 AM

The Mac can download anything Windows can. What is it you're trying to do?

Maflynn · Dec 26, 2003, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by eyes on me:
Im new to macintosh and I want to download stuff that I can't dl on macintosh. Some suggest using VPC, but I have no clue what I should pick. I have ibook G4 Mac OS X version 10.3, 933 MHz and 256 Mb. (will it run fast?) Please respond Thank You

Virtual PC is just that a software application that emulates a intel processor and being an emulator it will run slow. Now depending on how much ram and what processor you have will dictate how slow. The ibook g4 is a good start however 256mb is way to low for even OSX never mind VPC. If your serious about VPC max out the ibooks memory.

For the most part VPC with win 2000 seems to offer the best speed, turn off all of the visual bells and whistles and use a low color resolution. Winxp is just win2k with a lot more overhead so stay away from that.

The only advantage to downloading stuff with VPC is if the file is a self extracting, that is a .exe otherwise stuffit lite can extract all of the other files.

Good Luck
Mike

ckohler · Dec 26, 2003, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by eyes on me:
Im new to macintosh and I want to download stuff that I can't dl on macintosh.

It sounds to me like he is wanting to use a file-sharing program like Kazaa and doesn't realize there are MacOS alternatives like Poisoned that do the same thing. If this is the case, just visit versiontracker.com and search for the file sharing program you want to use.

eyes on me · Dec 26, 2003, 04:41 PM

I want to dl mirc, I know that theres ircle but ircle chan't join the channel that mirc can. Yuo file sharing too

Busemann · Dec 26, 2003, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by eyes on me:
I want to dl mirc, I know that theres ircle but ircle chan't join the channel that mirc can. Yuo file sharing too

Have you checked out Snak?

Angus_D · Dec 26, 2003, 05:08 PM

I find it hard to believe that Ircle can't join the same channel that mIRC can. They're both IRC clients. I don't know what "Yuo file sharing" is, so I can't say.

Jim_MDP · Dec 26, 2003, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by Maflynn:
The ibook g4 is a good start however 256mb is way to low for even OSX never mind VPC.

Wow, I'm so glad I saw this post of yours.

I had better run over now and yank Panther off my 233 Mhz, 128 Mb RAM Wallstreet.

That's really sad, right now it's hooked up to the external speakers and playing music streamed over the Airport from this Pismo anad using Remote Desktop to control it. Whew, at least I've got 384 Mb in this one, so I can keep Panther on it, right.

It's odd because, the Wallstreet is doing the much harder job of actually decoding the MP3 stream. Seems quite happy at it, got free physical ram even when doing multiple apps and it's only using about 35% CPU right now. Actually, Panther is damn sweet on it.

And I was having such a good time playing with it this way.

Oh well� c'est la vie.

OK, what you say about VPC is true, so consider the above just ribbing, though all true. I've done light work on this Pismo with both 2K and XP Pro giving them just 128k. 2K is useable, but XP's graphical overhead is just too much for this slow 400 Mhz G3 even with 160 Mb. It's not the RAM, it's the raw Mhz that will determine if it works for a given person's tasks. VPC is actually great about only using as much real RAM as it needs.

Maflynn · Dec 26, 2003, 06:47 PM

Never mind

bmhome1 · Dec 26, 2003, 10:11 PM

I ran XP Home on a 400 Pismo in VPC5 and 6 just fine.

The key: RAM. Clock speed is MUCH less important than having enough RAM to run BOTH OSX and VPC without ever paging out.

As soon as page-outs in VPC start, speed is useless, that's the reason dual processor G4 users complain about VPC speed.

If clock speed was the reason, they wouldn't complain and my 400 G3 would stall running XP. It didn't.

Allocate 256MB RAM to VPC, have at least 512MB running OSX, shut down all other applications, keep the drive image as small as possible and VPC speed is reasonable, even with a below-minimum spec for VPC6 G3. Elementary and no voodo.

MPMoriarty · Dec 27, 2003, 01:33 PM

If you can, I would recommend using the Windows 2000 version of Virtual PC. I have found that it offers the best in terms of reliability and speed.

I don't know why, but XP just seems slower and I always have more problems with it. This is weird because XP is just an updated version of Windows 2000.

Maybe it is all the additional GUI stuff they threw in. But I usually disable that anyway.

bmhome1 · Dec 27, 2003, 02:31 PM

For XP, disable ALL the animation effects (there's a lot of choices), run as Classic desktop and especially the file window as Classic instead of the Explorer style. Choose list as file display. Disable icon and thumbnail displays.

Disable system restore, any monitoring, any auto web checking. Disable sound and anything else non-essential for the application task needed.

Don't add Service Packs and especially Security Updates (unless on a Windows network).

Don't install anything unneeded such as Acrobat Reader.

Keep the drive image as small as possible. A 2GB size drive will run much faster than a bloated 4GB or 8GB drive image.

joe · Dec 28, 2003, 09:19 PM

Originally posted by eyes on me:
Im new to macintosh and I want to download stuff that I can't dl on macintosh. Some suggest using VPC, but I have no clue what I should pick. I have ibook G4 Mac OS X version 10.3, 933 MHz and 256 Mb. (will it run fast?) Please respond Thank You

I don't want to sound like a salesperson for M$

But the more you spend, the more you get. I recently bought Office Mac PE (professional edition) for work a couple of weeks ago. Essentially it's the latest Office Mac + VPC6.1 with WinXPpro for $479. Not a bad deal considering how much XPpro costs by itself. You're going to end up spending about 2/3 of that just buying VPC with XPpro anyway. It runs reasonbly well on my 1.25Ghz PowerBook.

Alternatively you could buy just VPC 6 by itself and supply your own OS. That's probably the cheapest way to go ($100-150 iirc) if you have an extra Windows pack lying around. I'm not sure if M$ sells it that way but Connectix use to. You may still find some Connectix plain VPC packages online.

rytc · Dec 28, 2003, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by joe:

Alternatively you could buy just VPC 6 by itself and supply your own OS.

I'd agree with this, buy a version of VPC that doesn't include Windows, then install your own copy. I'm not promoting piracy but in the case of Windows why throw more money at a bunch of fat cats wo IMHO are plenty rich as it is.

si_lance · Dec 28, 2003, 10:29 PM

Originally posted by rytc:
I'm not promoting piracy but in the case of Windows why throw more money at a bunch of fat cats wo IMHO are plenty rich as it is.

Well said.

bmhome1 · Dec 28, 2003, 11:01 PM

The Connectix OS Pack versions of XP and Pro also made the installation SO much easier and faster being modified versions of the retail OS installers, worth seeking out on eBay.

absmiths · Dec 29, 2003, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by rytc:
I'm not promoting piracy but in the case of Windows why throw more money at a bunch of fat cats wo IMHO are plenty rich as it is.

In fact, you are promoting piracy - you just feel that it is warranted in this case - if there is such a thing as "just" piracy. BTW, Steve Jobs and Co. are right on the top of the list of people who are "plenty rich" - there is no Robin Hood in the technology sector.