Look up a program called 'BOCHs', which is an open source intel
emulator.  On a fast computer it may go reasonably fast, but since the
instructions are emulated rather than run through the processor it is
much slower than an equivilant virtual pc program.  It was meant to work
an any platform/processor/etc.

When you look it up, it should refer to a similar, open source, virtual
pc program which only runs on intel compatible cpus, as it actually
passes the instructions through the processor and is much faster -
comparable to virtual pc, etc.

-Adam

William Chops Westfield wrote:

>OK, any strong reason to NOT use VIRTUALPC and install any other windows
>    platform along your Win98, and being able to run AUTOTRAX?
>
>Well, in the US, Virtual PC (which I didn't realize ran on PCs as well as
>Macs, although it should have been obvious) is more expensive than a rather
>capable used/surplus PC.  I'm not sure what personal computer ecconomics are
>like outside the USA, though, so I've been pretty quiet so far...
>
>I'd think that VPC would be subject to the same sort of "low level hardware
>access" issues as newer versions of windows?
>
>I like W98 quite a bit.  It's pretty much the newest OS without annoying
>limits in the name of security, and the first where network configuration is
>pretty painless.  I've run it on systems as small as a 90MHz Pentium (with a
>lot of memory) (mostly kids games on that one), and am running it currently
>on the P166 that drives the LPKF (that machine has a lot of memory too.
>Most of my memory comes from the dumpsters; only very occasionally indeed do
>I notice that W98 is actually paging/whatever to disk (at which point it
>DOES become painful!))
>
>BillW
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
>ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.
>
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body