>Probably. We have a machine with about twice the CPU and it runs Win2K
>in VMware, also 512MB RAM. Performance of this machine is good. XP is
>likely per the MS model to be more demanding of resources, but that is
>managed by VMware. I'd guess that if this machine would run XP native
>on whatever RAM you would give it in VMware, it will be fine.
>
>If Windows and good performance are both important, you might want to
>look at lighter alternatives. Win4Lin runs Win98 better than native,
>for most purposes. And there's WINE, which is free software.
>--

I'd say 512 meg is enough. I ran out of RAM with SuSE 8.1 (guest) and Windows
XP (host), but I only had 256 meg RAM. I'm assuming you mean Slackware as host
OS, and XP as guest OS. If you mean two guest OS plus one host OS, that's a
different matter.

VMware isn't that resource intensive in my experience. It's only that your RAM
is split between two OS. For instance if XP needs 256 meg for OS and progs,
and Slack needs 128 meg for OS, apps, and a lightweight manager; then 512 meg
would be fine. It really depends on how greedy the apps you run are. In other
words the question is only relevant when you mention the apps and desktop
environment and/or window manager you plan to use.

WINE and Win4Lin are mentioned above, but aren't as flexible as VMware. VMware
totally rocks.

Michael