From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <509071940609190319m2b5203ex229f9bd03dfd6601@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 06:19:59 -0400 From: "Anthony Sorace" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: Re: [9fans] Virtual PC server In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <7d3530220609181906l3ff6372dpce0c33dca3de1c51@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: ba6f58a8-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 9/19/06, Richard Miller <9fans@hamnavoe.com> wrote: > My experience with Virtual PC (on a 1.25Ghz G4) is that it's much > too slow for any kind of serious use. agreed, so long as you have to cross chip types. so i'd say it depends what "newer" means in the initial question. parallels, which just has to do the virtualization, not the chip emulation, runs Plan 9 quite well. if you're going that route, you'll likely find better performance on your mac than from your PII (depending on the specifics of what you're doing). i've been using Plan 9 in parallels for a while now, to see if it'll hold up in exactly that sort of environment. it's been good so far. biggest motivation for me was a desire to save the space and power consumption of another server. anthony