Talk:Microsoft Virtual PC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Microsoft Virtual PC article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of Computing WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to computers and computing. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an rating on the importance scale.

Virtual PC for Macintosh switched to the AMI BIOS with version 7.0. I know that the Windows version was already using the AMI BIOS at that point, but I'm not sure if that was from inception, or if there was a change. Clarification would be appreciated.

I struck "Even although they already had VM software, but they didn't want VirtualPC to be shipped with a tiny version of RedHat Linux." because it's not a complete sentence and somewhat unclear as to what the point is, nor is it neutral in tone. Finally, as a former employee of Connectix, I can say without a doubt that VPC with Redhat Linux was dead long before the Microsoft acquisition.Unseelie 16:51, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Virtualisation or virtual machine?

This article defines Virtual PC (for Windows) as a virtualization product (a generic category that includes virtual machine). However, the very similar VMware is defined as a virtual machine product. Which is more right? I think they should be consistent unless there is a fundamental difference I mised. Notinasnaid 10:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


A virtual machine (VM) is a technical term from the CPU designer's point of view. Virtualization is the process of using it. Anyone got links to any references on original uses of the terms? They'de explain this better. I seem to remember seeing VM mentioned first in an Intel CPU document (286/386 or the like). The idea was to have each program think it was running it's own copy of DOS when ran under Windows or other multitasking managers. Deskview (spelling?) was another multitasking environment. In Microsoft Windows 3.x/95/98/ME, there are 2 files called EMM386.EXE and KERNEL32.DLL that might be interesting to research. VMM: Virtual Machine Manager EMM386.exe: Expanded Memory Manager (not exclusively EMS) EMS: Expanded Memory Specification XMS: eXtended Memory Specification VCPI: Virtual memory Control Program Interface (Can't have VMs without seperate memory spaces!)

Two good references: http://www.qualitas.com/product/max/history.htm http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/msdos/05_memry.mspx?mfr=true

Sorry if this was a little long.  :) JWhiteheadcc 03:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Canceled

This page needs to be updated because Microsoft canceled Virtual PC http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/08/07/vpc/index.php . There is a lot of work needed for this page since they are no longer developing it and I have no idea where to start. DidYouLoseASock 01:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps less work than you think. Just because products are discontinued, cancelled or dying, it doesn't affect what you write about them, except to remove discussions of the future and add a note about any official announcements. Notinasnaid 16:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
The work seems to be finished. Notinasnaid 17:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't go that far. But it's coming along nicely. -- Steven Fisher 19:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree, there are a few things I see that need to be updated. DidYouLoseASock 21:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
If Virtual PC has a diffrent icon in windows then it should be changed to that. The image also should now be Vertual PC running in Windows. Best would be if some one could get an image of Vista running an older version of Windows. DidYouLoseASock 22:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Clarification: Microsoft canceled the **Mac** version only. -Andreas Toth

[edit] Dissappointed

Such a great piece of software, I wish I could say the same about this page. Unfortunately I cannot use this because I use Windows (What a Shame!)

Can you be more specific? This page covers both Mac and Windows versions of Virtual PC. What is disappointing? Notinasnaid 16:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I added a download link to External Links for MS' free version of Virtual PC for Windows. Unless you mean you're running an non-supported Operating System (IE 9x/ME).--70.18.190.183 19:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Virtual PC Guy

None of the External Links have a description after the link, so I dunno how this would look going after the blog link: " - Has articles on getting specific operating systems and legacy games running, as well as tips and tricks and scripting samples for both Virtual PC and Virtual Server." I think it would be helpful (I wouldn't expect to find info on how to get so many DOS games running. I'll let someone else add it if everyone doesn't think it'll break the format too much.--70.18.190.183 19:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pentium II with MMX

Isn't this sort of redundant? I used to think that Pentium II = Pentium Pro + MMX, and the Pentium II article essentially agrees with this. Was there ever a Pentium II without MMX instructions? At least according to the Wikipedia article, there wasn't. Aragorn2 13:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Formatting and FDISK within Microsoft Virtual PC

Is it safe to run disk format and FDISK within the virtual PC without damaging files on your physical hard disk?

Yes it is completly safe as far as I know and its incredibly fast compared to a real hard drive. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dr.-B (talk • contribs) .
Note that if a real (physical) drive is connected to the VM, then the real drive will really be formatted really well. --Scott McNay 04:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Virtual PC 2007 Released 2007-02-19

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/virtualpc/default.mspx

[edit] Controversy

I lack the prudence and grammar skills to create a consice edit, but I believe there deserves to be a controversy section to this article because of the recent ammendments to the Windows operating systems licence agreements that restrict usage of the OS in non-Microsoft-VPC products, such as VMware. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.154.253.105 (talk) 05:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Changed Trivia

Changed trivia to limitations, as this is more encyclopeadic in nature.

[edit] 32-bit

Made slight edit to mention that Virtual PC emulates/virtualizes 32-bit processors only.

This applies to all version prior to version 2007 (version 2007 is available as 32-bit and 64-bit versions). -Andreas Toth

[edit] Compatibility

Removed this text:

For example, a bug in VirtualPC 2004 SP1 in Windows is such that if there exists any installed printer using LPT1 in the host OS (i.e. Windows XP), the guest OS will be unable to use the printer port at all. This problem was corrected in Virtual PC 2007.

From this paragraph:

Not all programs are guaranteed to work because they can use undocumented features of hardware, exotic timings, or unsupported opcodes, although overall compatibility is considered excellent.[citation needed] Nonetheless, there are many issues that remain which detract from the overall experience, even within the expected/targeted OSes. For example, a bug in VirtualPC 2004 SP1 in Windows is such that if there exists any installed printer using LPT1 in the host OS (i.e. Windows XP), the guest OS will be unable to use the printer port at all. This problem was corrected in Virtual PC 2007.

If the LPT1 problem has been corrected in Virtual PC 2007, it is not an issue that "remains" in the product, and is therefore an invalid example of "issues that remain which detract..."

This is an encyclopedia, not an extension of ms product information. The fact that an issue is resolved in a newer release does not mean that it is solved in previous releases. So the bug is still there in msvp 2004.
The way you handle this is like removing the vietnam war from american history because 'the war is over' 82.170.120.233 09:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Windows 98

Is it possible to run Windows 98 if your main OS is XP and your hard drive is formatted with NTFS? I've got the Win98 Cd and it would be a shame if it was unusable.

Certainly: it's completely seperate. Mine works like a charm! --JaffaCakeLover 21:38, 22 June 2007 (GMT)


[edit] 3D Acceleration

I'm not sure how it would work, but can Virtual PC do 3D acceleration emulation? I'm not talking dx9 or anything, I mean I have a good few games that ran on 3DFX, and this is what my Win98 virtual machine was made for!

They do have Glide Wrappers that are supposed to let you play old 3dfx games using OpenGL cards... maybe install a wrapper in the virtual OS? Or not? Dunno!

--JaffaCakeLover 21:38, 22 June 2007 (GMT)

VMWare Workstation has some limited support for DirectX 3D accelerated graphics. -Andreas Toth

[edit] Limitations with Vista Home editions

This section is confusing. Is it refering to using Vista Home as the guest or host OS? Josh 18:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

In general you can state that msvm runs any windows version lower or equal to the host version. Exception is vista home, which will only run lower versions. This is a licensing issue, not a technical one.82.170.120.233 09:14, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Add to article

USB devices don't seem to be able to run under a Virtual PC. Should I add that? Astroview120mm 03:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

By all means... As long as you have sources... 203.14.53.15 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.14.53.15 (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
VMWare Workstation supports USB 2.0 devices. -Andreas Toth

[edit] supported OS'es

Does virtual pc support all microsoft operating systems from DOS and Windows 1.0 to XP? 160.7.234.154 01:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

It has a list of _supported_ OSes, although it /should/ work for others. There is no way to know without testing since so many things can be broken. To find the list, either try to create a virtual machine, or read the manual/website. It is also possible that although the OS (98SE for example) works when installed, that specific applications will fail. JWhiteheadcc 21:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Would it make for a more informative article to include, for whatever the latest version is at any given point (presently 2007), to include a list of 1) supported host operating systems 2) supported guest operating systems. It should be mentioned of course that just because MS doesnt support a particular OS as a guest does not necessarily mean it wont work. I leave it to your better judgement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.135.24.247 (talk) 22:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Isn't Virtual PC a Hardware emulator and therefore should support any OS? Random Devil (talk) 20:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

There can always be incompatabilities. Just like no OS will run on any hardware. Sometimes the problems are just plain stupid. I once tried to install a software on a virtual pc, cause it did not want to install on my Vista(please don't judge me ;-)). On the product it said "Win 98/2000". So I installed Win 2000 on a VPC, but the software still did not want to install. Prior to installation it tested the OS is was running on. Since the VPC with Win 2000 did not return "Win 2000", but something very strange, the Software refused to install ("OS is 'skdjksaj'...not Win2000 bla bla bla"), even if it would have probably run just fine. As you can see: There are still little differences between virtual and physical PCs and those sometimes make the difference. 78.54.123.242 (talk) 05:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] picture

Ok, I know the picture I uploade is quite old and plain, but I put it there for a few good reasons.

  1. It has one os to show the program itelf
  2. the new picture has linux, which is not supported.
  3. It is somewhat low-res
  4. it is smaller
  5. it doesn't fill the whole screen with a bunch of windows that mean the same thing.

I won't replace it yet, but I'd like some feedback on this. --Astroview120mm 05:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Supported hosts & guests

I think this section really is still confusing (it was earlier too) because "supported" has many different meanings:

  • Whether the license/EULA permits/"supports"
  • "Support" with virtual machine additions or without VM additions, including unpredictable results for "unsupported" OSes
  • Whether technically it is absolutely out of VPC's capabilities to install..e.g.64-bit guest OSes
  • "Supported hosts" has a different meaning because as such there aren't any feature differences/limitations amongst the SKUs preventing VPC to run ON THAT HOST OS.
  • The actual results a user may get e.g.XP Media Center is not "supported" but it behaves exactly like XP Professional

MS having now lifted the EULA restrictions for Vista, I propose to remove the SKU information, mention only 32-bit or 64-bit. - xpclient talk 09:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)