John's assessment sounds accurate to me, BUT for what it's worth, I have VirtualPC version 2.11 running under MacOS 8.6 on a 333 MHz G3 iMac with only 64M of RAM, and it's performance is approximately equal to a 100 MHz Pentium.

I don't know what Connectix did, but the minimum Mac requirements went up significantly, and PC performance went down starting with VirtualPC version 3.  From what I've heard, the OS X version is even more sluggish.

I'm going to the meeting tonight, so I'll see if I can talk to David some more about a port to Squeak.

						-Dean


-----Original Message-----
From: JohnMaloney at earthlink.net [mailto:JohnMaloney at earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:13 AM
To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Subject: Re: Reminder: Ottawa Carleton Smalltalk Users Group meeting Oct
3


Re:
>I have a old power mac 8500 at 150 mz. I have run both of the 
>mentioned products to test them on similar systems and speed is a big issue.
>I guess I will save the 150 dollars for my next computer buy. 
>There are also another other simulator called MacBochs based om Bochs pc simulator
>but is' very slow. 

I got Connectix VirtualPC for my 500 MHz PowerBook G4. It does work, but I'm
disappointed by the performance. Even an old 166 MHz PC laptop that I had
lying around was much faster than Virtual PC. It's too bad, because I really didn't
want to lug both a Mac and PC around, but I ended up doing just that because
the performance of VirtualPC was so frustrating.

Usually software isn't returnable, but if possible I'd recommend trying VirtualPC
before spending $150 to $200 on it.

	-- John