I last blogged about my experience with QEMU 71 days ago.

Since then I have brought up several other operating systems on it, including NT 4.0, Windows 2000 and FreeBSD 6.0. One thing I noticed is that the newer OSes has more demand on the system and therefore behaves more sluggishly, to the point of not being very useful.

My latest adventure with QEMU is a second try at Ubuntu 6.06 Beta (Dapper Drake).

Maybe it's because I have experienced Ubuntu once before, or maybe it's because Ubuntu 6.06 Beta is really that much better than 5.10, or maybe it's because I'm getting a little bit impatient with Fedora Core 5's degradations, my impression of Ubuntu has improved, even though it's running very slowly under QEMU.

To measure how much slower the emulated system is compared with the host system, I ran a little bench mark program that I found on the internet. The result can be found in the screenshot below:

The bench mark index is 294.0 on the host OS and 56.0 on the guest OS. So the guest is running at 19% of the speed of the host system, making my AMD64 3500+ look like a P3/700MHz.

Responses[8]

Posted by Weiqi Gao on May 2, 2006 11:08:46 PM CDT #

Java is simpler!

Final Approval Ballot:

On 2006-04-18 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with the following comment:
Hurrah!  Hurrah!  Hurrah!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-18 Suleiman, Hani voted Yes with the following comment:
Wheeeee!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-18 SAP AG voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-21 JBoss, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-25 Google Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-26 SAS Institute Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-26 Nortel voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-27 Borland Software Corporation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-28 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-04-28 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-05-01 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-05-01 Intel Corp. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-05-01 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
IBM's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR and is not a vote on the
 licensing terms.  IBM supports licensing models that create an open and level
 playing field by allowing third parties to create independent implementations
 of Java Specifications and that do not allow individuals or companies to exercise
 unnecessary control for proprietary advantage.  We support open source as a
 licensing model for contributions in the JCP, and would hope others will
 support this direction. This comment is not necessarily directed at the
 current business or license terms for this JSR, however, it is a statement of
 IBM's preferred licensing model.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-05-01 Oracle voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-05-01 Apache Software Foundation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-05-01 BEA Systems voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Add a comment

Posted by Weiqi Gao on May 2, 2006 9:57:52 AM CDT #