Re: Is tolerable speed possible with VPC 6.1.1?
From: Jim B (babcoc2_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 04/29/04
- Next message: Duderonomy: "Installing Additions... Guest?"
- Previous message: Mike: "Re: .NET Framework SDK 1.1 will not install..."
- In reply to: Stephen Adams: "Re: Is tolerable speed possible with VPC 6.1.1?"
- Next in thread: Jean-Miche: "Re: Is tolerable speed possible with VPC 6.1.1?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 29 Apr 2004 15:40:22 -0700
I have run VPC 6.1.1 for $$-making tasks and it is plenty fast enuff.
The reason I needed Windows2000 is access to Intenet Explorer 6.0; OS
X 10.2.8 does NOT support access to pages during live Java. I heard
Panther & Safari will but have not treid it (will do on next Project).
On another note; I see you are on a laptop. I use a Desktop 400MHZ G4
704 MB w/ 353MB given to W2000. I set the page size to 512 in W2000.
My desktop has a 1MB L2 cache which is *heavily* used by the VPC
emultaor. Laptops don't have one... This *could* be a big part of your
problem.
I will repeat a recent article from a 10.3.2 user. She has 4
suggestionws to speed up your Laptop. Here they are:
They apply to W2000... especially item #3 & #4
---------------------------------
[[ This message was also posted as:
<261220031741274131%Babcoc2@hotmail.com.invalid> ]]
In article <e7ec2ff2.0312251257.2a05c98@posting.google.com>, Andreas
Gast <Andreas@gastfamily.net> wrote:
> Here are a few suggestions to improve the performance of VPC 6.1
> (WinXP) under Panther 10.3.2 that I've gleaned from various boards and
> implemented on my 15" PB G4 (1 GB Memory):
>
> 1) When using a portable MAC and running on AC Power or a desktop MAC,
> go to your System Preferances, Energy Saver, and enable Highest
> Performance for the system.
>
> 2) In the main VPC Config Settings, make sure that your PC Memory and
> Total VRAM are set to their respective maximums.
>
> 3) Tweak your Windows XP settings (or Win2K), using the recommended
> tweaks on the Black Viper Optimization Web Site. (www.blackviper.com)
>
> This site also offers performance and installation suggestions for
> other Windows versions (Win ME, and Win2K Server), as well as Red Hat
>
> Note: Please use caution and prudence when implementing his suggested
> tweaks and performance enhancement tips. Read his information in
> depth before making the changes. Two major keys to improving WinXp
> and Win2K performance include disabling the Automic or Manual settings
> for the Indexing Service and the System Restore Service. In addition,
> his other enhancements can add zip back to Windows if you don't
> require a specific Windows Service enabled as either Automatic or
> Manual.
>
> 4) And finally the BIGGEST performance enhancement work around under
> VPC 6.1 and Panther is to disable the VPCSRVC.EXE (using the change
> method recommended on the Black Viper site, i.e. using the disable
> option under Windows Services Configuration Panel: Control
> Panel/Administrator Tools/Services and disable VPCSRVC.EXE. Your VPC
> machine will work fine, and the performance gain is very noticeable.
> What you lose with out this service is the ability to cut and paste
> between the Windows and Mac environments. This is clearly a work
> around until the MS MAC Team gets their code fixed for Panther.
>
> By following the above changes on my new PowerBook I have seen a very
> noticeable gain in performance (especially with item #4).
>
> Good luck and have a great New Year.
>
> Andreas
========================================================
Ahter you have done the above, check your C drive ... Is it 'bloated'
with temp files? Get rid of them by following this procedure:
-------
Subject: Re: Trying to reclaim zeroed hard drive space
From: SJ <essjae-No@Spam-hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.mac.virtualpc
Date: Tue, Nov 11, 2003 10:39 PM
Message-ID: <f9e3rvkgvorgt3t6at5i0oc0k01s5bv64f@4ax.com>
2 Ways to do it:
1. Free, long way:
Issue: Windows guest OS image file is much larger than the amount of
used space indicated inside the Windows guest OS.
Solution: When Windows installs, it copies a large number of
temporary files during the installation that are deleted when the
installation is finished. These copied temporary files cause the
guest OS image to be expanded. Virtual PC includes a utility to
compact the drive image. In Virtual PC for Macintosh it's the Virtual
Disk Assistant and in Windows, it is the Virtual Disk Wizard.
Before the Virtual Disk Assistant/Wizard can compact a drive image,
the unused space in the image must be zeroed out. This procedure uses
the utility Eraser, other zeroing utilities should also work.
This procedure is for Windows 95, 98, NT 4, and 2000 guest operating
systems.
1. Defragment the guest OS hard drive.
2. Backup any critical data in the guest OS.
3. Download Eraser, (http://www.tolvanen.com/eraser/) and install
it in the guest OS.
4. Run Eraser in the guest OS.
5. Select Edit->Preferences->Erasing
6. Select "Unused Disk Space"
7. Select "New"
8. Enter the description "Blank"
9. Select Add
10. Create a 1-byte pattern of all zeros; THEN repeat for Byte 2 & 3.
11. Click Save
12. Select "Blank" under "Unused disk space"
13. Click Ok
14. Select File->New Task
15. Select "Unused space on drive"
16. Select Local Hard Drives
17. Click OK
18. Select Task->run on the previously created task
19. Wait for completion
20. Close the report
21. Exit Eraser and shutdown the guest PC.
22. Use Virtual Disk Assistant/Wizard on the Host PC to reclaim
lost space
2. Fast, not free way
1. make a new disk image
2. attach it to the vm
3. boot with a ghost boot disk
4. ghost the image to the new disk image
5. remove the old disk image from the vm and replace it with the new
one
6. AFTER checking that your disk image works and has the data, delete
===================================================
That is all I have... There is a Perf ormanceTester (PT I thinl) that
will compare your W2000 to one on real hardware...I did that and found
my 'slow' G4 is just 50% of a 400 MHZ Pentium machine... not bad...
Cheers, Jim b
Stephen Adams <sea4929@spymac.com> wrote in message news:<#J5s7thLEHA.1644@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>...
> Winter wrote:
> >> Has anybody ever achieved anything approaching useable speed in VPC
> >> for OS X? It used to be so fast under OS 9!
>
> To Doug Lerner:
>
> In greatly over simplified terms, VPC under Mac OS 9 had complete
> control of the Mac and its hardware as long as it was not hidden or put
> into background tasking. As long as VPC was the foreground task, it got
> practically all of the Mac's resources.
>
> However, since Mac OS X is a Unix-type OS, it means that NO application
> has almost complete control of the Mac's hardware resources. Therefore,
> VPC must share them with any other Mac OS X program or Classic
> environment that you're running, in a manner dictated by the OS. As
> such, VPC will never appear to be running as fast as its OS 9
> counterpart... ever (in its current form).
>
> There are lots of tips floating about on how to improve VPC's
> performance under OS X, but they'll never come close to achieving the OS
> 9 execution speed.
>
> If VPC speed is an absolute must for you, then you need to reboot your
> Mac into OS 9 (if you have a Mac that can do that).
>
> > I think Virtual PC is a piece of garbage still in need of much
> > development.
>
> To Winter:
>
> And who is the current owner/distributor of VPC? And, what do they make
> most of their money on? It certainly isn't a Macintosh version of VPC,
> that's for sure. While I'm sure Microsoft will make some modest
> enhancements, notably to get VPC to run on G5 hardware, I doubt that
> they'll ever include those enhancements necessary to make it a viable
> competitor to Intel/AMD hardware running Windows.
>
> If your needs for a Windows environment exceed the current capabilities
> of VPC, Microsoft believes you'll best be served by purchasing the
> latest Windows OS on suitable hardware.
>
> > Obviously the speed factor makes it impossible to make it useful.
>
> Virtual PC was never intended to be a gaming platform. It was intended
> for those who Mac users who need to occasionally run non-gaming Windows
> or Linux software, such as Office, Outlook, Access, UPS WorldShip, Gnome
> Desktop, Red Hat, etc. It's also used by Web developers whose main
> machine is a Mac for them to make sure their designs and creations work
> to their satisfaction for Windows users.
>
> > And all the disclaimers should be posted not only on the website but
> > on the box as well.
>
> I don't know what Microsoft has done to the documentation with Virtual
> PC 6. I don't use that version. But Connectix, the original creator of
> the software, was forthcoming with these facts in versions 5 or older.
> In just about very piece of documentation, from the on line Help guides
> to the READ ME files and even on the former www.connectix.com Web site,
> there was a discussion of just what VPC could and could not do. Blame
> this one on Microsoft.
>
> > I thought I could play my pc games on it.
>
> Again, had Connectix continued to sell this product, you would have
> known that it was not a gaming solution. There is no provision within
> the Virtual PC code to take advantage of the accelerated 3D hardware of
> the Mac's video system. While plenty sufficient for office applications,
> they are worthless for playing any games more complicated than Windows
> Solitaire or id's Doom.
>
> > And what's the garbage about virtual pc 6.1 running on a Pentium II
> > and other scanty hardware specs? I think that s the problem.
>
> Those "scanty hardware specs" are sufficient for running Word, Excel, et
> al. Again, Virtual PC was not designed to take advantage of the Mac's
> accelerated 3D graphics hardware (Connectix's words... not mine). Also,
> Virtual PC sound is an emulated Creative Labs SoundBlaster 16. Virtual
> PC graphics is an emulated S3 Trio 32/64 PCI video card. Sufficient
> enough for plain ol' Windows apps.
>
> If you bought VPC for the purpose of running the latest PC games, it'll
> probably never happen. I'm sorry if you were misled into thinking it
> would be so.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Steve
- Next message: Duderonomy: "Installing Additions... Guest?"
- Previous message: Mike: "Re: .NET Framework SDK 1.1 will not install..."
- In reply to: Stephen Adams: "Re: Is tolerable speed possible with VPC 6.1.1?"
- Next in thread: Jean-Miche: "Re: Is tolerable speed possible with VPC 6.1.1?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
