Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #116707 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-05-26 11:22 -0400 |
| Last post | 2018-05-27 22:09 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 64 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-05-26 11:22 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-05-26 20:09 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-05-27 11:29 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? android <here@there.was> - 2018-05-27 18:03 +0200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-05-28 10:35 +1200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-27 18:57 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-05-27 19:13 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-05-28 14:21 +1200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Wolffan <akwolffan@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 22:27 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-27 22:35 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 20:52 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-05-28 18:33 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2018-05-27 22:35 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-05-31 08:49 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? "Snit's dysautonomia http://bit.ly/2Jqpplk" <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 04:41 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? "Snit's dysautonomia http://bit.ly/2Jqpplk" <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 08:20 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-05-28 19:30 +1200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 05:39 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-28 09:05 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 07:29 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-05-28 18:28 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 21:03 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-05-31 08:50 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-05-31 08:47 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-31 10:55 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-05-31 14:03 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-31 15:57 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? android <here@there.was> - 2018-06-01 06:16 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-01 03:01 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? android <here@there.was> - 2018-06-01 08:17 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2018-06-01 15:53 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-01 12:51 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? "Auric__" <not.my.real@email.address> - 2018-06-01 17:23 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-01 14:11 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-06-01 14:26 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-01 14:35 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-06-01 17:29 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2018-06-02 15:58 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-06-02 11:37 -0500
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-06-03 12:13 +1200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? "Snit's dysautonomia http://bit.ly/2Jqpplk" <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 05:59 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-06-03 23:10 -0500
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-06-04 19:22 +1200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2018-06-05 03:39 -0500
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-06-06 09:29 +1200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 02:49 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-04 07:16 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-06-02 01:37 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-06-02 01:29 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2018-06-02 19:10 +1200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2018-06-02 23:32 +1200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-02 09:03 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-06-02 14:34 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-02 14:35 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-06-02 14:31 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2018-06-02 15:49 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-06-01 14:23 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-01 14:35 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-06-02 13:47 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2018-06-05 09:16 +0000
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2018-05-31 08:46 -0400
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 16:31 -0700
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? android <here@there.was> - 2018-05-28 06:52 +0200
Re: Hard 64 bit. Will 32 bit still run in a VM? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 22:09 -0700
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 18:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <bo%OC.123602$wG5.39067@fx02.iad> |
| In reply to | #116801 |
On 2018-05-28 09:05, nospam wrote: > not that anyone would notice, other than for gpu intensive tasks, which > aren't virtualized. Not sure Fusion grants the Windows instance direct access to the graphics card. The release notes mentions it supports Metal which imply that it intercepts graphical operations done by the Windows guest OS.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 21:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <41e0f352-e0df-4b28-989a-3f876a4b17ab@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #116806 |
On Monday, May 28, 2018 at 3:28:27 PM UTC-7, JF Mezei wrote: > On 2018-05-28 09:05, nospam wrote: > > > not that anyone would notice, other than for gpu intensive tasks, which > > aren't virtualized. > > Not sure Fusion grants the Windows instance direct access to the > graphics card. The release notes mentions it supports Metal which imply > that it intercepts graphical operations done by the Windows guest OS. Allah's posts are nothing but a senseless babble. It was Allah who forged me (and others) and bragged about it. If Allah calls being busted using socks every single day by John Gohde (and completely destroying his name and any reason for me to give credence to anything he has to say - for the rest of time) effective 'trolling', then no doubt... he is a great troll. I don't agree with that view, I use another term. I call that person a total asshat. Utter idiocy by an ignorant, fibbing, deceitful, co-trolling mouth-breather who would not be honest if his life depended on it. Just look at Allah's videos and look at John Gohde's, there is nothing for us to learn from an idiot like Allah. But knock yourself out, let him keep making a moron of himself. It is not like anyone believes him. -- E-commerce Simplified https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OffkiSAsYo8 https://youtu.be/48_DdtLGR9s Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-31 08:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Veqdnb9C1qsScpLGnZ2dnUU7-fFg4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #116786 |
On 2018-05-28 03:30, Your Name wrote:
> But, yes, emulating Windoze 10 (just as an example, I'm not saying it
Virtualization ≠ Emulation.
Every time this sort of subject comes up, someone lights "emulation" up
and distracts from the real issue.
--
"2/3 of Donald Trump's wives were immigrants. Proof that we
need immigrants to do jobs that most Americans wouldn't do."
- unknown protester
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-31 08:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Veqdnb1C1qt7c5LGnZ2dnUU7-fGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #116778 |
On 2018-05-27 22:27, Wolffan wrote:
> On 27 May 2018, Your Name wrote
> (in article <pefp2i$rdh$1@gioia.aioe.org>):
>
>> On 2018-05-27 23:13:59 +0000, JF Mezei said:
>>> On 2018-05-27 18:35, Your Name wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As long as the emulator itself is programmed to run as 64-bit, what
>>>> runs on it is irrelevant to MacOS 10.14 and later.
>>>
>>> Whether emulated or not (Fusion lets Windows runs native without
>>> translation, but intercepts certain operations).
>>>
>>> The question to me is whether when Fusion intercepts a 32 bit operation,
>>> if it passes it to the equivalent 32 bit OS-X API or whether it converts
>>> this to 64 bit APIs and 64 bit addresses. (and there would be some
>>> fancy virtual memory footwork involved).
>>>
>>> This will dictate what happens when Apple pulls 32 bit APIs out.
>>
>> Technically Parallels and VMWare aren't emulators - they're
>> virtualisation apps, but a similar stance applies. What may happen is
>> that the developers simply change their "recommended" options to no
>> longer allow older non-64-bit OSes. It really depends on how difficult
>> it is for them to continue to support old OSes and whether there are
>> enough users of old OSes to warrant that effort.
>>
>> In some cases is might require changing from a virtulisation app to an
>> emulation app (i.e. one that does do on-the-fly translation of
>> everything), which may mean a drop in performance.
>
> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation
Virtualization ≠ Emulation.
--
"2/3 of Donald Trump's wives were immigrants. Proof that we
need immigrants to do jobs that most Americans wouldn't do."
- unknown protester
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-31 10:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <310520181055320051%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #116837 |
In article <Veqdnb1C1qt7c5LGnZ2dnUU7-fGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote: > > I remember Virtual PC. Emulation > > Virtualization ‚ Emulation. virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and emulated x86.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-31 14:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <WPqdnYxTqopypY3GnZ2dnUU7-ROdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #116840 |
On 2018-05-31 10:55, nospam wrote:
> In article <Veqdnb1C1qt7c5LGnZ2dnUU7-fGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
> <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>
>>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation
>>
>> Virtualization ≠ Emulation.
>
> virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and emulated x86.
Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's.
--
"2/3 of Donald Trump's wives were immigrants. Proof that we
need immigrants to do jobs that most Americans wouldn't do."
- unknown protester
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-31 15:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <310520181557176390%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #116841 |
In article <WPqdnYxTqopypY3GnZ2dnUU7-ROdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote: > > > >>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation > >> > >> Virtualization ‚ Emulation. > > > > virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and emulated x86. > > Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's. it's not irrelevant. virtual pc was an emulator.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | android <here@there.was> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 06:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan$f28f7$11ddd071$7eda305f$afbb16a5@there.was> |
| In reply to | #116842 |
On Thu, 31 May 2018 15:57:17 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in 310520181557176390nospamospam@nospam.invalid: > In article <WPqdnYxTqopypY3GnZ2dnUU7-ROdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne > <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote: > > >> >>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation >> >> >> >> Virtualization Emulation. >> > >> > virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and emulated >> > x86. >> >> Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's. > > it's not irrelevant. virtual pc was an emulator. liar. had a couple of those and it emulated the processor, not windows... -- teleportation kills
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 03:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <010620180301237221%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #116859 |
In article <pan$f28f7$11ddd071$7eda305f$afbb16a5@there.was>, android <here@there.was> wrote: > >> >>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation > >> >> > >> >> Virtualization ? Emulation. > >> > > >> > virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and emulated > >> > x86. > >> > >> Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's. > > > > it's not irrelevant. virtual pc was an emulator. > > liar. had a couple of those and it emulated the processor, not windows... of course it emulated the processor. nobody said otherwise.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | android <here@there.was> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 08:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan$b4acd$34851632$62b03956$c9d28a50@there.was> |
| In reply to | #116861 |
On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 03:01:23 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in 010620180301237221nospamospam@nospam.invalid: > In article <pan$f28f7$11ddd071$7eda305f$afbb16a5@there.was>, android > <here@there.was> wrote: > >> >> >>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation >> >> >> >> >> >> Virtualization ? Emulation. >> >> > >> >> > virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and emulated >> >> > x86. >> >> >> >> Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's. >> > >> > it's not irrelevant. virtual pc was an emulator. >> >> liar. had a couple of those and it emulated the processor, not >> windows... > > of course it emulated the processor. nobody said otherwise. it did not emulate windows, idiot! -- teleportation kills
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 15:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fnd8fbFjr8qU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #116863 |
On 2018-06-01, android <here@there.was> wrote: > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 03:01:23 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote > in 010620180301237221nospamospam@nospam.invalid: > >> In article <pan$f28f7$11ddd071$7eda305f$afbb16a5@there.was>, android >> <here@there.was> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Virtualization ? Emulation. >>>>>> >>>>>> virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and >>>>>> emulated x86. >>>>> >>>>> Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's. >>>> >>>> it's not irrelevant. virtual pc was an emulator. >>> >>> liar. had a couple of those and it emulated the processor, not >>> windows... >> >> of course it emulated the processor. nobody said otherwise. > > it did not emulate windows, idiot! My my... Someone is #TRIGGERED. He didn't say it "emulated Windows", and the fact that you are resorting to name calling shows you have nothing constructive to add to the conversation. nospam is right: Virtual PC is a hardware emulator that allows Windows to run on Macs. End of story. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 12:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <010620181251199604%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #116869 |
In article <fnd8fbFjr8qU3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Virtualization ? Emulation. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and > >>>>>> emulated x86. > >>>>> > >>>>> Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's. > >>>> > >>>> it's not irrelevant. virtual pc was an emulator. > >>> > >>> liar. had a couple of those and it emulated the processor, not > >>> windows... > >> > >> of course it emulated the processor. nobody said otherwise. > > > > it did not emulate windows, idiot! > > My my... Someone is #TRIGGERED. > > He didn't say it "emulated Windows", and the fact that you are resorting > to name calling shows you have nothing constructive to add to the > conversation. nospam is right: Virtual PC is a hardware emulator that > allows Windows to run on Macs. End of story. as well as several other operating systems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Auric__" <not.my.real@email.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 17:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA8F469AD1552Bauricauricauricauric@85.214.115.223> |
| In reply to | #116863 |
android wrote: > On Fri, 01 Jun 2018 03:01:23 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote > in 010620180301237221nospamospam@nospam.invalid: > >> In article <pan$f28f7$11ddd071$7eda305f$afbb16a5@there.was>, android >> <here@there.was> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Virtualization ? Emulation. >>> >> > >>> >> > virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and emulated >>> >> > x86. >>> >> >>> >> Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's. >>> > >>> > it's not irrelevant. virtual pc was an emulator. >>> >>> liar. had a couple of those and it emulated the processor, not >>> windows... >> >> of course it emulated the processor. nobody said otherwise. > > it did not emulate windows, idiot! Sure it did, it emulated Windows very well... when installed on top of the emulated system. I never ran VPC on a Mac, but I remember reading that it was the best PC emulator available for PPC Macs. (It also ran very well on Windows, which may be why Microsoft bought it, but that's a different thing entirely.) -- We disclaim all responsibility where Pete's dice are concerned.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 14:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <010620181411117117%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #116876 |
In article <XnsA8F469AD1552Bauricauricauricauric@85.214.115.223>, Auric__ <not.my.real@email.address> wrote: > >>> >> >>> I remember Virtual PC. Emulation > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> Virtualization ? Emulation. > >>> >> > > >>> >> > virtual pc was an emulator which ran on powerpc macs and emulated > >>> >> > x86. > >>> >> > >>> >> Irrelevant. This thread is about VM's. > >>> > > >>> > it's not irrelevant. virtual pc was an emulator. > >>> > >>> liar. had a couple of those and it emulated the processor, not > >>> windows... > >> > >> of course it emulated the processor. nobody said otherwise. > > > > it did not emulate windows, idiot! > > Sure it did, no it didn't. it emulated x86. > it emulated Windows very well... when installed on top of the > emulated system. I never ran VPC on a Mac, but I remember reading that it was > the best PC emulator available for PPC Macs. windows was the most common reason to use virtual pc, but not the only reason. in addition to windows, it could run dos, linux and even openstep (the ancestor of mac os x). > (It also ran very well on > Windows, which may be why Microsoft bought it, but that's a different thing > entirely.) the windows version of virtual pc was a completely different product, which was virtualization, not emulation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 14:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <9dgQC.180134$IF4.166102@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #116877 |
On 2018-06-01 14:11, nospam wrote: > the windows version of virtual pc was a completely different product, > which was virtualization, not emulation. I am not sure about that. In those days, the then durrent 8086s didn't yet support multiple OS instances and carving of devices between instances. Today's 8086s have hardware features that allow this. (and this is what VMware does, it leverages those features to allow different operating systems to share the CPU but each have their own devices.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 14:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <010620181435445520%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #116879 |
In article <9dgQC.180134$IF4.166102@fx14.iad>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > > the windows version of virtual pc was a completely different product, > > which was virtualization, not emulation. > > I am not sure about that. i am. <https://www.os2world.com/wiki/index.php/Connectix_Virtual_PC> Connectix Virtual PC (renamed Microsoft Virtual PC) is a virtualization suite for Microsoft Windows operating systems, and an emulation suite for Mac OS X on PowerPC-based systems. The software was originally written by Connectix, and was subsequently acquired by Microsoft.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-01 17:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <aViQC.293700$br4.169686@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #116881 |
On 2018-06-01 14:35, nospam wrote: > <https://www.os2world.com/wiki/index.php/Connectix_Virtual_PC> > Connectix Virtual PC (renamed Microsoft Virtual PC) is a > virtualization suite for Microsoft Windows operating systems, and an > emulation suite for Mac OS X on PowerPC-based systems. This page is more recent than the 1990s. the 8086 didn't support OS virtualization until 2006. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_virtualization ## In the late 1990s x86 virtualization was achieved by complex software techniques, necessary to compensate for the processor's lack of virtualization support while attaining reasonable performance. In 2006, both Intel (VT-x) and AMD (AMD-V) introduced limited hardware virtualization support that allowed simpler virtualization software but offered very few speed benefits.[1] Greater hardware support, which allowed substantial speed improvements, came with later processor models. ## VMware was started in 1998 and launched in 1999. If the guest OS can't be allowed to manipulate the hardwre's virtual memory, then the host application needs to trap any of its attempts to play with virtual memory page table. Note that just because the gues OS runs the same instruction set doesn't rule out "emulation". If you need to "approve" every instruction so you can trap and handle special instructions, it likely falls in the "emulation" category. So it all depends on how they did it prior to 2005-2006.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-02 15:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <fnft4aF5023U7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #116884 |
On 2018-06-01, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 2018-06-01 14:35, nospam wrote: > >> <https://www.os2world.com/wiki/index.php/Connectix_Virtual_PC> >> Connectix Virtual PC (renamed Microsoft Virtual PC) is a >> virtualization suite for Microsoft Windows operating systems, and an >> emulation suite for Mac OS X on PowerPC-based systems. > > This page is more recent than the 1990s. the 8086 didn't support OS > virtualization until 2006. And Microsoft just so happened to release it in July 2006 - imagine that. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-02 11:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <0MidnSRy7OVUWo_GnZ2dnUU7-SfNnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #116884 |
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2018-06-01 14:35, nospam wrote:
> > <https://www.os2world.com/wiki/index.php/Connectix_Virtual_PC>
> > Connectix Virtual PC (renamed Microsoft Virtual PC) is a
> > virtualization suite for Microsoft Windows operating systems, and an
> > emulation suite for Mac OS X on PowerPC-based systems.
> This page is more recent than the 1990s. the 8086 didn't support OS
> virtualization until 2006.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_virtualization
> ##
> In the late 1990s x86 virtualization was achieved by complex software
> techniques, necessary to compensate for the processor's lack of
> virtualization support while attaining reasonable performance. In 2006,
> both Intel (VT-x) and AMD (AMD-V) introduced limited hardware
> virtualization support that allowed simpler virtualization software but
> offered very few speed benefits.[1] Greater hardware support, which
> allowed substantial speed improvements, came with later processor models.
> ##
> VMware was started in 1998 and launched in 1999.
> If the guest OS can't be allowed to manipulate the hardwre's virtual
> memory, then the host application needs to trap any of its attempts to
> play with virtual memory page table. Note that just because the gues OS
> runs the same instruction set doesn't rule out "emulation". If you need
> to "approve" every instruction so you can trap and handle special
> instructions, it likely falls in the "emulation" category.
> So it all depends on how they did it prior to 2005-2006.
I remember using VPC in Mac OS X v10.2.x on my PB G4. I didn't like it
compared to VMware Workstation when I started using it. I'm glad we have
VirtualBox now. It is much nicer and free now. :)
--
Quote of the Week: "Really. And do these lions eat ants?" --John Cleese in Monty Python's Flying Circus
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
| |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link.
\ _ /
( )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-03 12:13 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <pevbqa$tsq$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #116915 |
On 2018-06-02 16:37:29 +0000, Ant said: > > I remember using VPC in Mac OS X v10.2.x on my PB G4. I didn't like it > compared to VMware Workstation when I started using it. VirtualPC was fine, if slow, on my beige G3 in OS 8 and 9. I really only used it to access a Windoze clip art CD, create Windoze versions of FileMaker Pro solutions, and s-l-o-w-l-y play a couple of games. > I'm glad we have VirtualBox now. It is much nicer and free now. :) The free apps like VirtualBox aren't as easy to set-up as the professional products Parallels Desktop and VMWare Fusion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web