steve30
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:22 am
Does anyone know how well SoftWindows will run on a PowerBook 1400/133?
I have used Virtual PC 3 with Windows 3.1 and if I remember rightly, it was very slow. I wasn't sure if SoftWidnows would be any faster.
Dan 7.1
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 10:31 am
well enough i should think. it obviously won't be blazing fast but you can run softwindows on 68k's so i would hope that a PPC could handle it.
alk
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 11:59 pm
SoftWindows might be a bit faster than VPC, too. SoftWindows benefits from only having to emulate Windows and a HAL as opposed to a complete PC.
Peace,
Drew
_________________
Power to the PowerPC!
steve30
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:45 am
Would there be much speed difference between Widnows 3.1 and Windows 95 in SoftWindows?
Cory5412
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:28 am
Windows 3.1 uses less resources, so it'll be faster, but Windows 95 will run newer apps. Although, I suppose the age of the apps shouldn't matter much, as both 95 and 3.1 will have some really really old apps, and would only be marginally useful online. (NT4 is where it's at, for retro Windows productivity.
)
_________________
[Insert Cool Signature here!]
The Macster
Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:20 am
95's not actually as bad as you might think - it can run IE 5.5 or Firefox 1.5 (I think - certainly 1.0 works but not 2.0) and Office 2000.
_________________
Main system: custom C2D 2.66GHz tower/4GB RAM/2600XT 512 MB/500GB HD/XP Pro x86+Vista Business x64
Main Mac: Beige G3 minitower (Sonnet G4 500MHz/640 MB DVD/USB/Radeon 32 MB/OS 9.2.2+10.4.11)
Cory5412
Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:19 am
I'll have to try that some day since I recently got a machine that'd be good with Windows 95 -- it'd be similar to running it in VPC on a 1400 (if not faster, this is a P120 with a 1.2 gig hdd, and I can upgrade it to 40 or more of ram.)
_________________
[Insert Cool Signature here!]
steve30
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:17 am
I recently obtained a Pentium 133 system which had Windows 95 on it. Seems fast enough for some tasks.
For Internet stuff, I won't be using it with the Internet, or it is unlikely that I will be.
Cory5412
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:13 pm
A real P/133 will be a few magnitudes faster than VPC on a 603/133 -- especially if you can give the P/133 a good chunk (32mb or more) of ram.
_________________
[Insert Cool Signature here!]
steve30
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:55 am
lol. I forgot they both had the same clock speed.
If one shows up at an affordable price on eBay, I might get a G3 accellerator for the 1400. Although a floppy drive is still my top priority.
Speaking for floppies, I just bought two packs of 10 coloured HD disks
. I've never had coloured disks before (except DD ones which I use on the Amiga).
Cory5412
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 1:34 pm
around here, it's actually cheaper to get colored ones than normal ones. Even cheaper if they're neon see-through colored disks. Weird, but ohwell.
Makes it difficult for people who want to make large, uniformly colored backup sets.
_________________
[Insert Cool Signature here!]
steve30
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 2:57 pm
I want some of those neon ones. I have seen them and they look so cool!
I also got a pack of 20 black ones. Total came to about £6 on ebay for both the black ones and the coloured ones.
Single coloured ones like black or blue or white tend to be cheaper here than coloured ones.
