Win4BSD -- any comments or experiences?

[Juergen Lock]

In article <d356c5630904240925y25a2ec11m429e57001880c073 at mail.gmail.com> you write:
>On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Matthias Apitz <guru at unixarea.de> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Subscribed in a FreeBSD mailing list in Spanish, I've got a pointer to
>> this software:
>>
>> http://win4bsd.com/wp/win4bsd-free-for-non-commercial-use/
>>
>> Any comments about or test results in compare with Qemu?
>> Thx
>>
>>        matthias
>> --
>> Matthias Apitz
>> Manager Technical Support - OCLC GmbH
>> Gruenwalder Weg 28g - 82041 Oberhaching - Germany
>> t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211
>> e <matthias.apitz at oclc.org> - w http://www.oclc.org/
>> http://www.UnixArea.de/
>> People who hate Microsoft Windows use Linux but people who love UNIX use
>> FreeBSD.
>> _______________________________________________
>>  <freebsd-questions at freebsd.org>
>
>
>I played with win4bsd for awhile.  It works well for normal desktop usage.
>Unfortunately, virtual os setups do not handle complex data analysis of
>extremely large data sets well.  I think it has to do with memory
>usage/management.  Otherwise, I liked win4bsd a lot.

Well I haven't actually tried win4bsd, only researched about it one the
web a little once and noticed it seems to be based on an old version
of qemu (it still uses kqemu 1.3.* not 1.4.* like current qemu - which
btw is the only reason I haven't removed the old kqemu from ports and
renamed the new one, i.e. emulators/kqemu-kmod still is the old one.)

 Now does that mean current qemu is better/more stable than win4bsd if
all you want is emulate something like xp?  I don't know...  (Maybe the
win4bsd folks have incorporated other fixes that aren't in qemu yet?
At least they certainly seem to have added features...)

 Cheers,
	Juergen