Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

What about support for Windows Virtual PC ?


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 Sevilho

Sevilho

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 136 posts
  • Location:Moscow
  • Interests:Make my living environment better
  •  
    Russian Federation

Posted 17 May 2011 - 04:28 PM

successor to Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 ?

#2 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 17 May 2011 - 05:00 PM

As far as I remember, there exists a script for this.

But why not use such great freeware like VirtualBox?

Peter

#3 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 17 May 2011 - 05:36 PM

Because VirtualPC is also freeware. :dubbio:

:thumbsup:

#4 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 16066 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 17 May 2011 - 05:43 PM

Because VirtualPC is also freeware. :thumbsup:


But is it also "great"? :dubbio:

;)

:whistling:
Wonko

#5 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 17 May 2011 - 06:48 PM

Before we come to that, let's first prove that VitualBox is great to start with. :dubbio:

:thumbsup:

#6 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 16066 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 17 May 2011 - 07:04 PM

Before we come to that, let's first prove that VitualBox is great to start with. :thumbsup:

Sure :), you are right :dubbio:, I trusted peter's word for it :unsure:, being myself an old dinosaur, and normally running just Qemu.... :whistling:

Probably it became great after this ;):
http://reboot.pro/7758/
:w00t:

:(
Wonko

#7 al_jo

al_jo

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 1218 posts
  • Location:Tellus

Posted 17 May 2011 - 07:28 PM

There is no need for either VirtualBox or VirtualPC scripts.
Just make the ISO and load it into your VM…

:dubbio:

#8 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 16066 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 17 May 2011 - 07:35 PM

There is no need for either VirtualBox or VirtualPC scripts.
Just make the ISO and load it into your VM…

:thumbsup:

Well, but what if you want to run INSIDE the PE a VM (say to run a Linux of some flavour or a DOS)?

:dubbio:

AND Qemu is not good for it? :whistling:

;)
Wonkko

#9 al_jo

al_jo

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 1218 posts
  • Location:Tellus

Posted 17 May 2011 - 07:50 PM

Well, but what if you want to run INSIDE the PE a VM (say to run a Linux of some flavour or a DOS)?

:dubbio:

AND Qemu is not good for it? :whistling:

;)
Wonkko

Sorry, I don’t see any reason to run a VM inside a PE!
Explain please... :thumbsup:

#10 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 17 May 2011 - 09:33 PM

Probably it became great after this :thumbsup::
http://reboot.pro/7758/
:whistling:

:dubbio: You're mean!


Sorry, I don’t see any reason to run a VM inside a PE!

The reasons are just the same as n a normal OS.
Checking out an ISO, if it suits your needs, before burning it to a CDVD, for instance.

#11 Sevilho

Sevilho

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 136 posts
  • Location:Moscow
  • Interests:Make my living environment better
  •  
    Russian Federation

Posted 18 May 2011 - 06:28 PM

As far as I remember, there exists a script for this.

But why not use such great freeware like VirtualBox?

Peter

Historically it happened that when I was studying technologies from Мicrosoft, then for the laboratory study, we used Windows virtual PC 2004. And it worked great. Well, in Russia we have a saying, "let well enough alone:). Ie if something works good do not look for alternatives :)

And yet. WinBuilder is based on Microsoft. It is therefore natural to use and the VM from MS. Microsoft has always closely used in their products integrate with OS Windows.

Edited by Sevilho, 18 May 2011 - 06:39 PM.


#12 Sevilho

Sevilho

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 136 posts
  • Location:Moscow
  • Interests:Make my living environment better
  •  
    Russian Federation

Posted 18 May 2011 - 06:31 PM

There is no need for either VirtualBox or VirtualPC scripts.
Just make the ISO and load it into your VM…

:)


A few topics before me have already explained that if the use of VM inside a constructor, the improved interface = need to make fewer clicks.

Edited by Sevilho, 18 May 2011 - 06:34 PM.


#13 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 16066 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 18 May 2011 - 07:20 PM

And yet. WinBuilder is based on Microsoft. It is therefore natural to use and the VM from MS. Microsoft has always closely used in their products integrate with OS Windows.

Just for the record ;), BOB :( also was a Microsoft Product, perfectly integrated in Windows (3.1 at the time).
This in NO way makes it better than ANY other shell, actually it made it worse than ANYHTING ever seen running in the PC and even to-day, ONLY the bloatness of .Net :cheers: can be compared as amount of terror that is induced to a sane user.

http://en.wikipedia....i/Microsoft_Bob
http://toastytech.com/guis/bob.html

Microsoft does not always mean "good" (nor "bad" :) ) and never means that a concurrent product can (or cannot :unsure: ) be "better".

:cheers:
Wonko

#14 al_jo

al_jo

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 1218 posts
  • Location:Tellus

Posted 18 May 2011 - 08:27 PM

A few topics before me have already explained that if the use of VM inside a constructor, the improved interface = need to make fewer clicks.

I always delete no needed scripts = VM scripts.
Because I want to have control over what I’ doing.
But you do it your way, of course!
:)

#15 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 18 May 2011 - 09:27 PM

Before we go into a M$ against the rest of the world topic, let's not forget, that VirtualPC was not developed by the guys in Redmont, but bought from Connectix.

:)

#16 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10616 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 18 May 2011 - 10:15 PM

And yet. WinBuilder is based on Microsoft. It is therefore natural to use and the VM from MS. Microsoft has always closely used in their products integrate with OS Windows.

Correction is needed my friend.. WinBuilder is based on reboot.pro, it is not owned by MS so we can choose our own style of work.

WinBuilder likes QEmu over all other alternatives.

QEmu from Fabrice Bellard is extremely small (less than 10Mb), portable and runs Windows OS's with enough quality. Also, we have express permission from the author of QEmu to distribute these products with Winbuilder and the same can't be said for VirtualPC.

Hope this helps to clear our position in terms of preferred Virtualizers.

:)

#17 Sevilho

Sevilho

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 136 posts
  • Location:Moscow
  • Interests:Make my living environment better
  •  
    Russian Federation

Posted 19 May 2011 - 07:10 PM

Correction is needed my friend.. WinBuilder is based on reboot.pro, it is not owned by MS so we can choose our own style of work.

WinBuilder likes QEmu over all other alternatives.

QEmu from Fabrice Bellard is extremely small (less than 10Mb), portable and runs Windows OS's with enough quality. Also, we have express permission from the authors of QEmu and VirtualBox to distribute these products with Winbuilder. The same can't be said for VirtualPC.

Hope this helps to clear our position in terms of preferred Virtualizers.

:)


Of course, every product has its pros and cons. Just today announced a new VirtualBox, v.4.0.8 (2011-05).
FEATURES:
• 64-bit guest systems (MS 32-bit only, I think)
• Support USB 2.0 (device, host machines available for guest)
• support for a hard disk VMDK (VMware) and VHD (Microsoft Virtual PC)
• support public folders for sharing files between host and guest system (removed in MS)
• added new virtual components: Intel ICH9 chipset and Intel HD Audio

#18 Brito

Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10616 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 19 May 2011 - 07:14 PM

Of course, every product has its pros and cons. Just today announced a new VirtualBox

Yes, Virtual Box has a lot of support from Oracle and that is good.

QEmu is my favorite but unfortunately it is only supported by the author and a few more fans and updates come at slower pace. Would be nice to see a non-profit association stepping forward to help with financing to QEmu and further developments.

Oracle seems to be getting their hand on a lot of things lately. Perhaps one day they also acquire Ubuntu and MS altogether.. :)

#19 Sevilho

Sevilho

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 136 posts
  • Location:Moscow
  • Interests:Make my living environment better
  •  
    Russian Federation

Posted 19 May 2011 - 07:24 PM

Before we go into a M$ against the rest of the world topic, let's not forget, that VirtualPC was not developed by the guys in Redmont, but bought from Connectix.

:cheers:

That was long ago :). To figure out the historical truth even remember what MS DOS v1.0 was slightly modified version of the purchased QDOS :cheers:

#20 Sevilho

Sevilho

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 136 posts
  • Location:Moscow
  • Interests:Make my living environment better
  •  
    Russian Federation

Posted 19 May 2011 - 07:31 PM

Oracle seems to be getting their hand on a lot of things lately. Perhaps one day they also acquire Ubuntu and MS altogether.. :cheers:


No, it seems that M$ will be evergreen :)

Edited by Sevilho, 19 May 2011 - 07:31 PM.


#21 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 19 May 2011 - 07:41 PM

WinBuilder likes QEmu over all other alternatives.

You are the boss, and your opinion is therefore also my opinion.
But please allow me "very cautious" to public my private opinion:
qEmu is extremely slow in booting, is rather old, and IMO not supported since a long time.
Would be great to see here

WinBuilder likes VirtualBox over all other alternatives.

Peter

#22 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 19 May 2011 - 08:14 PM

The one reaon i still treasure my VPC over all else is, that it is the only VM to emulate a real graphics card, which makes all the difference, when running or testing really weird OS.

:cheers:

#23 Icecube

Icecube

    Gold Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 1063 posts
  •  
    Belgium

Posted 20 May 2011 - 10:36 AM

qEmu is extremely slow in booting, is rather old, and IMO not supported since a long time.

On Linux, you have kvm (Kernel-based Virtual Machine), which has the same syntax (commandline options)as qemu. kvm uses hardware virtualisation, so it is similar in speed as VirtualBox.

#24 Sevilho

Sevilho

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 136 posts
  • Location:Moscow
  • Interests:Make my living environment better
  •  
    Russian Federation

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:53 PM

There are dozens of wonderful free virtual machines. All of them are in their own good. Until ... no requirement to set a 64-bit guest OS. And then the world is compressed into a pea.

QEMU keeps a stiff upper lip only.

The rest, either do not support 64-bit Guest (Parallels Workstation, Windows Virtual PC) or require CPU VT support (VMware Player, Oracle VM VirtualBox).

QEMU was quite slow: Boot ISO takes 3 minutes and 33 seconds. Enabling kqemu accelerator gave quite a bit: 3:30.
Used is quite old v.0.9 by 2007. I would like to see the v1.0 from 2012 in hopes of getting faster.

VMware Player is much faster: about 50 sec (but for 32-bit guest).

#25 sambul61

sambul61

    Gold Member

  • Advanced user
  • 1568 posts
  •  
    American Samoa

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:23 PM

I didn't expect QEMU to support a 64-bit Guest, unless you're talking about WinXP 64-bit, if at all. VMWare does it pretty easily, but if you're into VMs, you better upgrade RAM to 8Gb min for multiple program runs. It works on 4Gb too, but some stuttering may occur. :)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users