So VPC faster under OS 9 than X?
When will the PCMCIA P4 compatibility card be out? :)
H. Entot
On Behalf Of John Lyon Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 10:19 PM
On 3/18/02 16:04, Aron Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For grins, try running Windows 95 under Classic in
VPC.Quite fast and
It's not that bad. Win2k on a TiBook 550 is very usable.
Well, I am willing to post performance results. I have used PC since
the DOS days and this is really slow. Maybe Win2K is better but Win
98 is dog slow. I would say unusable.
Here's a recommendation for the more technically inclined -
On 3/19/02 11:30, aron nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(but first, _I_ wrote:)
It's not that bad. Win2k on a TiBook 550 is very usable.
Well, I am willing to post performance results. I have used PC since
the DOS days and this is really slow. Maybe Win2K is better but Win
98 is dog slow. I
Anyone have much experience w/ Virtual PC on the 550- and 667-MHz
TiBooks?
Speed?
Benchmarks?
That oh-so-intangible Feel/Perception?
Also, any comparison w/ Intel hardware laptops are appreciated. How does
it compare w/ a P3 or P4-M running Win2K? Or even XP if you have
experience with
On 3/18/02 14:38, Bruce Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hott Entot wrote:
Anyone have much experience w/ Virtual PC on the 550- and 667-MHz
TiBooks?
Whoa..it's an emulator. Every _freakin'_ review of VPC I've ever read
says 'But it's dreadfully slow compared to a real PC'.
Hey, that P133
VPC on a tiBook running classic will feel like a 200-300 mhz Pentium or
Pentium II, maybe, depending on what you're doing with it. (note not P3
or P4)
For grins, try running Windows 95 under Classic in VPC.Quite fast and
useable. Too bad you really need Win 98 for most stuff - then it's
back
