pycage: wouldn't qemu count as a virtualization platform as well as an emulator?

The fact that this discussion is necessary could be part of the reason Asus and Acer dropped Linux.

The biggest part of the reason is called money.

Hi people,
I was thinking about the remote possibility to run a very simple graphical application for Windows on a upcoming N900. I know there's no x86 processor, so that should be emulated.

First, I was asking myself what's faster or reccomended, Bochs or Qemu (anything else?)? (as of running on a N900, I guess we'll have to wait till they're around..)

Second, is it possible to install a basic linux distro on it with only wine and the stricktly needed stuff for a graphical window for the emulated application, and run for example notepad/calculator (or any other very simple windows application)?
If yes, we could then experiment what the application limit is, based on performance (unusable stuff is unusable )..

thx for reading!

ps. as I read here, a qemu port should exist and work ?!? (on N900 too maybe ?!?) dunno about a eventual bochs port, but in that thread it seems like it worked for somebody too...

I suspect running Wine on top of an x86 emulator would be excruciatingly slow and prone to crashing. You might be able to run a simple windowed program, but anything using DirectX in any way would be fail.

The best bet for using windows programs on an n900 is through a remote x server/desktop setup. You would run the program on either a windows computer or a desktop linux computer (via Wine), and then "export" the window to the n900 through a program designed to do that. On linux that would be an x server/client setup. Windows has a remote desktop feature, but i don't know if a client exists for linux.

While this probably could be done for fun and to earn respect among geek friends, I don't believe the results to be anything that is actually usable (i.e. running some useful closed-source application that has no native equivalent with reasonable speed).

Ok, I imagined that running a cpu emulator + basic linux + wine wasn't so slow, since the only emulated part is the cpu. And I didn't mention DirectX, I was thinking about basic exes with a graphical interface. In the remote case where those would work decently, nothing stops from experimenting heavier stuff...

I know we have mostly an equivalent for every important application, but you never know; and yes, it would be also for some geeky satisfaction.

I think that the amount of hackery dackery doo required to enable x86 emulation and provide a virtualized Windows environment on top of a linux OS running on an ARM processor...just to run some Windows app...is simply too much for any sane person to bear.

If forced to do it, I would rather eat a .40 cal slug from my Sig.

I know it was an innocent request/inquiry....but no...please....just NO.

lol, ok, sorry...

No, thecursedfly, DO NOT GIVE UP!

With DOSBox many here were able to actually run Windows 95! It was slow as ****, but it WORKED! With the extra horsepower of the N900, you might actually be able to run a few apps!

Also there is a Mac emulator, Basilisk, that runs OS8 apps very well.

So don't give up!