[skyman]

I am thinking of buying VPC 6 for OS X.

Can anyone give me an idea of the performance of VPC 6.

Pros & Cons?

Thanks!

[wataru]

There have already been tons of threads about VPC6. Try doing a search.

[clarkgoble]

It is SLOW. If all you need do is access data or run the occasional program it is fine. If you need to run any program a lot, well, consider buying a cheap PC off eBAy.

Don't get me wrong. What they've done is cool. I originally got it to install OpenBSD, which hasn't worked properly yet. However it is nice being able to run the occasional utility that is PC only. Before Direct Connect, I used it for Kazaa. It is sweet how you can share PC hard drives and how, under Windows, the cursor moves so fluidly over the VPC window. It even puts an icon on the dock for your XP applications.

However the speed is simply not there. A few people were quoting it as being equivalent to a 300 MHz PIII. Not even close, at least on a dual 867. Further it does use up a lot of clock cycles as well. Not as serious an issue on the dual, due to the way the SMP works there. However if I had a single processing system I'd not even consider VPC except for very specialized needs.

As I said, you are better off with an external computer that you remote control. I've got a 400 MHz AMD based portable that I'm going to try that with this week.

[iRebound]

yea, vpc is dog slow. you can build a cheap pc for the price of vpc. just use ms remote desktop to connect to a pc. it's very fast.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by skyman:
I am thinking of buying VPC 6 for OS X.

Can anyone give me an idea of the performance of VPC 6.

Pros & Cons?

As someone else mentioned, it's no good for games or other CPU-intensive programs.

On my machine it runs win2k roughly like a 300 mhz - at least for what I do (testing interfaces, checking web sites, etc.) but others report much worse performance - it depends a lot on L2/L3 cache size.

Also, win98 runs much slower than win2k.

[PubGuy]

VPC6 is working fine for me with OS X 10.2.3 --- and I only need ONE computer.

I've been using VPC since switching to MAC about 3 years ago. I am a consultant and Microsoft Access database programmer. VPC was still a little slugglish, but it allowed me to work on my main desktop computer and laptop without have a matching set of PC's.

VPC is faster. The response now is acceptable. Let's face it, most programming is typing in text, so it works great for me.

My wife uses VPC6 on NT2000 running Quickbooks 2002. Quickbooks is a dog...even on a PC. But, VPC is working fine for her to accompish her work on her iMac G4, backup to a ZIP drive, then restore to a PC and back again.

So, I don't have any complaints (and I don't need a PC!!!).

- PubGuy

[Bobby]

Originally posted by clarkgoble:
It is SLOW. If all you need do is access data or run the occasional program it is fine. If you need to run any program a lot, well, consider buying a cheap PC off eBAy.

Isn't "cheap" and "PC" redundant???