“Microsoft confirms that Virtual PC is not compatible with the new G5 Power Macs: “Virtual PC relies on a feature of the G3/G4 processors called ‘pseudo little-endian mode’ for increased performance when emulating a Pentium processor…. Because the new G5 processor does not support this feature, large portions of the VPC for Mac program must be rewritten and carefully tested to work properly on the G5 CPU,” reports MacNN.
MacDailyNews Take: Hmmmm… Wonder how fast a G5 could emulate a Pentium, run Windows and Windows applications? Guess we’ll have to wait for Microsoft to “optimize” it, huh?
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Bill Gates to Steve Jobs regarding Virtual PC: Checkmate – February 19, 2003
FWB: There is no RealPC; it’s vaporware and it’s discontinued – August 27, 2003
And so it begins…
1.6 MB free x86 emulator:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/unix_open_source/bochs.html
I doubt it’s as polished as VPC, but can anyone comment on how usable it is or isn’t vs. VPC?
SteveJack was right the day MS bought Virtual PC, “Virtual PC for Macintosh is dead.” This was back in February 2003.
“Bill Gates to Steve Jobs regarding Virtual PC: Checkmate”
To those who said otherwise, you can apologize to SteveJack now.
If I were writing Microsoft code it would seem logical to do the conversion in one place and call the conversion as a subroutine. If its necessary for performance reasons it could be written as inline code. For Microsoft to say that they have to make massive code changes means that their implementation is rather sloppy.
MacBU has done some good work before… could it be Connectix’s sloppiness?
But I too am skeptical that one little mode can’t be worked around more simply. Maybe doing so would hurt performance so much as to be not worth it?
There COULD be another MS conspiracy at wrk here, but I don’t think one can be assumed yet.
I take this as good news. Now maybe we can get away from the “use Virtual PC” answer to the lack of software argument. It was false anyway. Eliminating Virtual PC will be good for Mac. OS 10.3’s native developer tools – Xcode – will make developing apps for Mac even easier than it already was.
Good bye VPC. Good riddance.
VPC is an abomination, err, was an abomination, but SteveJack was right in the “Checkmate” article that Apple should’ve bought Connectix and used VPC as a bundled iApp to entice PC’ers to buy Macs. They could use their Windows software while replacing it at their own speed with Mac versions that would run faster. Once they tried OS X, they would see how bad Windows really is. Apple screwed up here.
Differences in endian mode can make for some serious re-writing. However the PowerPC architecture and the G5 does indeed support little endian mode. See the IBM 64 bit programmers manual for the 970 located at http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/products/PowerPC_970_Microprocessor .
The issue seems to concern a feature of the G3/G4 which allowed the processor to emulate little endian mode while it was actually in big endian mode. On the G5, it appears that you can either be in little endian or big endian mode but not both at the same time. Switching state continuously would create a huge overhead and probably result in running as slow as molasses. I haven’t been able to verify this just yet, but there appears to be some truth to Microsoft’s claims. And, if it is true, Microsoft will have to go through the entire code they inherited from Connectix to fix it.
<VPC as an iApp> VPC alone is not enough, it would mean that every OS X would need to include a Windows XP license, or one would need to be bought separately. It would also mean that the Mac would be judged by how well it ran Intel code. The negatives out way the positives by a mile.
Sounds like to me, Micro$not, in their “wisdom” (not) wants to dumb down this VPC so far as to not make themselves look bad…..buying ANYTHING from them is like the wolf guarding the sheep for the farmer…..he’ll get lambchops by the end of the day.
Tell them to take VPC and a hike off of a short cliff!!
Surprise surprise. Any rewrites of VPC done by microsoft are going to be messed up even worse than they already are anyway so M$ should just give up on vpc.
What happened to the RealPC project? Was it stopped by Microsoft? I heard that somewhere… Hmmm… Now Microsoft says that it can’t get it’s act together for a while with regard to VPC? Like until much faster chips ship for the Wintel crowd.
Imagine if VPC issued a updated version for the G5 and released on the same date along side the G5. Then imagine that Microsoft didn’t intentionally cripple it’s emulation performance. Then let’s pretend that Microsoft made an honest effort to optimize the hell out of VPC.
How fast would that product run XP on a dual 2.0 G5?
Do you honestly think this would EVER happen. Oh it’s completely doable… especially given the resources MS has… oh yes… but again, do you really think Microsoft would EVER, EVER, EVER this happen?
Big deal, if you need to run windows so bad, go buy a Wintel box. I had VPC 5 on my at home G4 so that I could bring eng. work home. What a hunk of junk software. After I retired it was the first thing I put in the trash can. It’s probable is not a M$ plan, but who cares? It would not be to Bill and the boys benefit to axe VPC. After all it’s still a copy of Windoz sold and money in their greedy little pockets.
It is very interesting to me that the RealPC and Virtual PC announcement would take place on the same day considering FWB’s new management. Something just doesn’t smell right to me.
tthomcarl:
You don’t get it. MS doesn’t care about a relatively small number of Windows licenses that might be sold through VPC. That’s not in their best interest. However, they do care about protecting current peceptions regarding the Mac -vs- Windows debate. Do you honestly think MS wants to complicate things by proving Windows can run properly and easily on a Mac>?
BTW, I agree with you on one thing –at present (since VPC needlessly s*cks so badly), if I wanted to run Windows software I’d just buy a Wintel box.
Quote from paulprrn:
“It is very interesting to me that the RealPC and Virtual PC announcement would take place on the same day considering FWB’s new management. Something just doesn’t smell right to me.”
No kidding. Lesson: Never play chess with Microsoft (or any other dirty b*stard).
who cares, if you want to run crap butt pc garbage windows buy a walmart pc. making a mac run windows is like putting a vw engine in a new jag. pointless.
“Big deal, if you need to run windows so bad, go buy a Wintel box.”
Exactly!
I use a Mac so I can be free from that kind of mediocrity, and more importantly, the DOLTS who flock to the Wintel platform.
I think you meant “…is like putting a Cavalier engine in a new Jag…”
Could it be that if Apple bought Connectix, they would have given into the fact that Windows is hard to escape from? I’d like to think that Apple thinks it can offer everything people would need on their platform. Why give into MS?
It’s easy to say VPC should not exist, but in fact it’s a VERY useful product. Some don’t need it. Some do. Being able to run BOTH OS’s on Mac, which is not true of a Wintel box, is a good thing.
Buying an actual PC instead of an emulator can be a great option–I did it myself–but VPC is a BETTER option in some cases:
* If the cheap PC you bought is cheap for a reason. (My eMachines died 3 times… the 3rd time was out of warranty.)
* If you don’t want (or can’t fit) another computer (and an ugly one at that) taking up space in your home or your life.
* If you’re getting MS Office anyway (VPC with Win XP is just $100 more).
* If you don’t use Windows heavily enough/often enough to demand speed.
* If you don’t want to troubleshoot Windows hardware and networking.
* If you like the convenience of “waking” VPC instantly for use instead of powering up a PC from scratch; and the convenience of drag-and-drop between platforms with no network needed; and the convenience of having Win and Mac apps side by side on one screen.
* If you are a portable user. Lugging along two laptops is neither economical NOR convenient.
I did get my actual PC working again–I put in a new power supply myself–but the convenience of VPC means I never turn the real thing on. It collects dust. I’m willing to sacrifice speed (VPC IS sluggish!) for the sake of not powering my eTower on. One click on the Dock and I’m in Windows. I find it to be a VERY useful product, and one I hope has a great future even though I wish it was less in MS’s hands. (I would have liked an FWB alternative.)
The apps I run in VPC are not lightweight, either: Flash, Director, D3Edit (3D game editor–yes, usable even with textures and no hardware OpenGL), and misc. apps I make and test for Windows clients.
Gotta love those Mac hating jerks over at CNET with their typical anti-Mac slant about this.
http://news.com.com/2100-1042_3-5068747.html
As usual, they blame Apple and the G5 for the problem rather than pointing the finger of blame where it should be pointed….At the typical shoddy programming and planning on the part of MS!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the VPC product only useful to Mac users still tied to the ball and chain? Seems a little odd to be blaming the new G5 for not being able to run Windows rather than asking the DUH question of the week…
“Why hasn’t MS bothered to make VPC compatible with the next generation of Mac hardware when it is released?”
Adobe and all the other REAL software companies have. ???
Any problems with how VPC 6 is programmed would have come from Connectix, not MS. As to whether it’s as difficult to solve as MS claims… I’m not the one to judge.
Jeeze ! Relax you guys. This is not M$ fault. This kind of thing can be a huge effort to fix and test. It’s an architecturaly difference, so it’s not like they could really do much about it.
This time the M$ bashing is completely misplaced.
(I’m not saying their purchase of Connectix wasn’t a bad thing, but hit single problem with the byte/bit order is NOT M$’s fault.
I don’t blame MS (for once) for this situation. They only took ownership of the program 6 months ago, and maybe they didn’t plan to update it this soon. Wow, I can’t believe I just stuck up for MS! Whoodathunk! At any rate, regarding their ownership of Virtual PC, I would love for them to realize what an opportunity they have here and act on it. They could actually put some serious money into developing VPC into an even better product, one that does everything RealPC promised and more, and lower the price to make it extremely affordable. I mean come on, with $40 billion, I’d have a really hard time believing that they couldn’t make it work really fast, and really well if they wanted to. That way, everyone wins, including Apple, and including Microsoft. People would have the choice to buy whatever type of computer they wanted and run any software they wanted. More people would switch to Macs, but still purchase Windows licenses, PC developers would sell even more software, and, for once, Microsoft would be considered the good guy. OK, I guess companies like Dell wouldn’t benefit from this but truthfully that doesn’t bother me in the least bit.
Sigh. OK, now I’ve come to my senses. This is Microsoft we’re talking about. They’re not interested in improving the state of technology, they just want to control everything and everyone.