P
Paul
IA64 = Itanium processor (for servers)J. P. Gilliver (John) said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium (Wiki will be down soon for
its one day protest against SOPA...)
Paul
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium (Wiki will be down soon for
its one day protest against SOPA...)
Paul
S
Steve Hayes
Are those transparent to the user?If you want Windows 7's XP mode, yes.There are three major versions of Windows 7: 32-bit (x86) and 64-bit
(x64) and IA64.
Also, you must have the Windows Professional versoional or better.
However, there are third-party virtual machines that work fine in
Home Premium: VirtualBox and VMWare Player, or two. You should be
able to run legacy programs under those. I ran the 16-bit games from
the Windows [3.1] Entertainment Pack that way.
In other words, if you want to run a program that that needs them, can you
just run the program and they will load automatically, or do you have to load
them first?
S
Seth
Semi-transparent. XP-Mode, while running on the VPC engine is more akin toSteve Hayes said:Are those transparent to the user?If you want Windows 7's XP mode, yes.is there a solution for that?
it makes no sense to destroy backward compatibility, is this true?
thank you
There are three major versions of Windows 7: 32-bit (x86) and 64-bit
(x64) and IA64.
Also, you must have the Windows Professional versoional or better.
However, there are third-party virtual machines that work fine in
Home Premium: VirtualBox and VMWare Player, or two. You should be
able to run legacy programs under those. I ran the 16-bit games from
the Windows [3.1] Entertainment Pack that way.
In other words, if you want to run a program that that needs them, can you
just run the program and they will load automatically, or do you have to
load
them first?
a consumer version of MED-V than raw VPC.
T
TheGunslinger
Likely, it was because the additional layer of code required to supportWhat is the third one - I mean, how does it differ from the other two?TheGunslinger said:[]
it makes no sense to destroy backward compatibility, is this true?
thank you
There are three major versions of Windows 7: 32-bit (x86) and 64-bit
(x64) and IA64.
[]Why? I don't mean technically why - I'm sure you can tell me thatA lot of legacy software contains or is 16-bit based. Windows 7 64-bit
only supports 32-bit and 64-bit.
(incompatible file versions and so on), I just mean why was that
decision made? Like Maurizio, I am puzzled by it.
it was too much bloat (heh - now there's a thought, MS thinking a
feature might add too much bloat!), especially for the relatively few
users who actually need it.
That, or just wanting to make a cleaner break - legacy support is a
major impediment to future growth.
I think either MJR mis-spoke or you misunderstood.In particular, that puzzles me. Even if there is some reason not to
support legacy software in the underlying OS, not supporting it via an
emulator seems a`_very_ odd decision, bordering on the vindictive!
Windows 7 64-bit Pro / Enterprise (and Ultimate, I think I forgot that
in earlier posts) all support XP mode, which runs a 32-bit version of
XP, which will run 16-bit and balky 32-bit software just fine. Also,
the latest version of MS Virtual PC can run XP 32-bit, with the same
capabilities.
Finally, if you are running a 32-bit version of Windows 7, you don't
need the emulator / virtual machine at all, it will run most XP-
compatible 32-bit and most 16-bit software just fine without an
emulator / virtual machine.
Zaphod, Sorry, I didn't misspeak.
I have 5-PC's set-up my house. I am such a geek. /sigh
My 64-bit Win 7 Pro laptop is set-up with XP-Mode, and will only run
pure 32-bit software.
My 32-bit Win Pro desktop won't run XP-Mode. However, by installing MS
Virtual PC 2007, I have virtual OS's of: MS DOS 6.22/Windows for
Workgroups 3.1; Windows 98; Windows Millenium; and Windows XP.
BTW, Windows Millenium Edition was the first true 32-bit OS release.
If you are careful, you can sometimes see the onscreen flash stating
that "NT Kernel" loaded.
You can't install Windows Millenium Edition under 64-bit Windows 7 and
Virtual PC.
I have heard that you can get better options using VMWare, but,
personally, I haven't tested it.
TTYL,
MJR
Z
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Likely, it was because the additional layer of code required to supportIn message <[email protected]>, TheGunslinger
[]
it makes no sense to destroy backward compatibility, is this true?
thank you
There are three major versions of Windows 7: 32-bit (x86) and 64-bit
(x64) and IA64.
What is the third one - I mean, how does it differ from the other two?
[]
A lot of legacy software contains or is 16-bit based. Windows 7 64-bit
only supports 32-bit and 64-bit.
Why? I don't mean technically why - I'm sure you can tell me that
(incompatible file versions and so on), I just mean why was that
decision made? Like Maurizio, I am puzzled by it.
it was too much bloat (heh - now there's a thought, MS thinking a
feature might add too much bloat!), especially for the relatively few
users who actually need it.
That, or just wanting to make a cleaner break - legacy support is a
major impediment to future growth.
I think either MJR mis-spoke or you misunderstood.As a result, Windows 7 64-bit ONLY uses the latest version of
Microsoft Virtual PC.
HOWEVER, if you install Windows 7 32-bit, you can install Microsoft
Virtual PC 2007 for legacy OS's, you can install XP, Windows Millenium
and 98, AND MS-DOS 6.22.
In particular, that puzzles me. Even if there is some reason not to
support legacy software in the underlying OS, not supporting it via an
emulator seems a`_very_ odd decision, bordering on the vindictive!
Windows 7 64-bit Pro / Enterprise (and Ultimate, I think I forgot that
in earlier posts) all support XP mode, which runs a 32-bit version of
XP, which will run 16-bit and balky 32-bit software just fine. Also,
the latest version of MS Virtual PC can run XP 32-bit, with the same
capabilities.
Finally, if you are running a 32-bit version of Windows 7, you don't
need the emulator / virtual machine at all, it will run most XP-
compatible 32-bit and most 16-bit software just fine without an
emulator / virtual machine.
Zaphod, Sorry, I didn't misspeak.
I have 5-PC's set-up my house. I am such a geek. /sigh
Only 5? You have much to learn, grasshopper.
My 64-bit Win 7 Pro laptop is set-up with XP-Mode, and will only run
pure 32-bit software.
Then you are doing it wrong. Windows 7 Pro with XP Mode is quite happy
running 16-bit software since XP mode is a 32-bit version of XP. I
know, I'm doing it now.
My 32-bit Win Pro desktop won't run XP-Mode.
Windows 7 Pro? XP Mode should work just fine, we use it all the time.
Of curse, it is a rare program that requires it since you can run 16-
bit programs in Windows 7 32-bit without it. Again, we do it all the
time. The only ones that don't work right are those that use DOS
graphics modes or which require DOS full-screen mode which Vista and
Windows 7 don't support but which work fine in XP Mode.
However, by installing MS
Virtual PC 2007, I have virtual OS's of: MS DOS 6.22/Windows for
Workgroups 3.1; Windows 98; Windows Millenium; and Windows XP.
That *is* a benefit of the full Virtual PC, assuming you have licenses
of course.
BTW, Windows Millenium Edition was the first true 32-bit OS release.
If you are careful, you can sometimes see the onscreen flash stating
that "NT Kernel" loaded.
You are seeing things. Windows ME was most certainly *NOT* based on
the NT kernel. It did run in 32-bit Protected Mode as soon as the boot
loader was finished and the DOS Real Mode stuff was no longer needed
though (not "on top of DOS" like many claim).
You can't install Windows Millenium Edition under 64-bit Windows 7 and
Virtual PC.
That, I don't know. Never had the need to try, though I'd be curious
why it wouldn't.
As I understand it, VMWare does have its advantages but I'm not aI have heard that you can get better options using VMWare, but,
personally, I haven't tested it.
VMWare user (yet) so I can't really comment.
--
Zaphod
Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster: A cocktail based on Janx Spirit.
The effect of one is like having your brain smashed out
by a slice of lemon wrapped round a large gold brick.
C
Char Jackson
This almost sounds like a classic case of installing XP mode, but thenThen you are doing it wrong. Windows 7 Pro with XP Mode is quite happy
running 16-bit software since XP mode is a 32-bit version of XP. I
know, I'm doing it now.
expecting 16-bit programs to "just work". They have to be launched
from inside the virtual machine (VM), not merely launched on the same
system that hosts the VM. Or am I mistaken?
Z
Zaphod Beeblebrox
You are correct, you have to launch them inside of the VM. Generally,This almost sounds like a classic case of installing XP mode, but then
expecting 16-bit programs to "just work". They have to be launched
from inside the virtual machine (VM), not merely launched on the same
system that hosts the VM. Or am I mistaken?
also means configuring XP Mode to see the drive they are stored on as a
drive letter, rather than a UNC path since most 16-bit software doesn't
understand UNC.
Also, some can't handle drive letters above P. Borland Turbo Pascal
programs most notably - but only some of them are affected. Depends on
how they use storage.
Some also can't handle long path names. And the list goes on...
Now, to me proper configuration of the environment is part of what
makes a program "just work" but then, I've lived through it all since
the introduction of the personal computer so it comes with the
territory...
T
TheGunslinger
Not too much really to learn considering I have had a PC of one sortIn message <[email protected]>, TheGunslinger
[]
it makes no sense to destroy backward compatibility, is this true?
thank you
There are three major versions of Windows 7: 32-bit (x86) and 64-bit
(x64) and IA64.
What is the third one - I mean, how does it differ from the other two?
[]
A lot of legacy software contains or is 16-bit based. Windows 7 64-bit
only supports 32-bit and 64-bit.
Why? I don't mean technically why - I'm sure you can tell me that
(incompatible file versions and so on), I just mean why was that
decision made? Like Maurizio, I am puzzled by it.
Likely, it was because the additional layer of code required to support
it was too much bloat (heh - now there's a thought, MS thinking a
feature might add too much bloat!), especially for the relatively few
users who actually need it.
That, or just wanting to make a cleaner break - legacy support is a
major impediment to future growth.
As a result, Windows 7 64-bit ONLY uses the latest version of
Microsoft Virtual PC.
HOWEVER, if you install Windows 7 32-bit, you can install Microsoft
Virtual PC 2007 for legacy OS's, you can install XP, Windows Millenium
and 98, AND MS-DOS 6.22.
In particular, that puzzles me. Even if there is some reason not to
support legacy software in the underlying OS, not supporting it via an
emulator seems a`_very_ odd decision, bordering on the vindictive!
I think either MJR mis-spoke or you misunderstood.
Windows 7 64-bit Pro / Enterprise (and Ultimate, I think I forgot that
in earlier posts) all support XP mode, which runs a 32-bit version of
XP, which will run 16-bit and balky 32-bit software just fine. Also,
the latest version of MS Virtual PC can run XP 32-bit, with the same
capabilities.
Finally, if you are running a 32-bit version of Windows 7, you don't
need the emulator / virtual machine at all, it will run most XP-
compatible 32-bit and most 16-bit software just fine without an
emulator / virtual machine.
Zaphod, Sorry, I didn't misspeak.
I have 5-PC's set-up my house. I am such a geek. /sigh
Only 5? You have much to learn, grasshopper.
or another since 1985. These are just the systems I consider worth the
effort to keep running.
I have a couple more out in the Garage though. 2-Commodore VIC-20's
and a 64. I have game cartridges and expansion cards and an old color
TV that was used for a monitor. LOL.
I used to set the VIC-20 up for the kids when they were toddlers.
Interesting, I didn't have any luck getting a lot of my older legacyThen you are doing it wrong. Windows 7 Pro with XP Mode is quite happy
running 16-bit software since XP mode is a 32-bit version of XP. I
know, I'm doing it now.
stuff to run. Could be that some of my really old programs are a combo
of 8/16 bit or 16/32 bit programming, and XP-Mode arbitrarily decides
they won't run? I get messages indicating 'wrong version' of operating
system when it checks for requirements in its compatible software
database?
XP-Mode is designed for Win 7 Pro+ x-64 or IA64, 64-bit versions.
For the 32-bit version, you have to use Virtual PC 2004 or 2007, and
install the OS you want to use. Since I have legacy OS's all the way
back to MS-DOS 5.0, I can pretty much install w/e I want.
Yeah, Win 98/98SE was the last version that the gui ran on top of DOS.Windows 7 Pro? XP Mode should work just fine, we use it all the time.
Of curse, it is a rare program that requires it since you can run 16-
bit programs in Windows 7 32-bit without it. Again, we do it all the
time. The only ones that don't work right are those that use DOS
graphics modes or which require DOS full-screen mode which Vista and
Windows 7 don't support but which work fine in XP Mode.
That *is* a benefit of the full Virtual PC, assuming you have licenses
of course.
You are seeing things. Windows ME was most certainly *NOT* based on
the NT kernel. It did run in 32-bit Protected Mode as soon as the boot
loader was finished and the DOS Real Mode stuff was no longer needed
though (not "on top of DOS" like many claim).
As I said, if you catch the screen just right, it displays...'NT
kernel' loaded... Too bad I've never been able to get a screen shot
since it during the boot.
G
Gene E. Bloch
I have been known to set up a video camera in front of the screen toAs I said, if you catch the screen just right, it displays...'NT
kernel' loaded... Too bad I've never been able to get a screen shot
since it during the boot.
capture a BSOD. It can work.
This was before I learned how to disable the instant reboot on BSOD.
Z
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Intended more as a bit of tongue in cheek humor - apparently, thatNot too much really to learn considering I have had a PC of one sortOn Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:39:15 -0500, Zaphod Beeblebrox
In message <[email protected]>, TheGunslinger
[]
it makes no sense to destroy backward compatibility, is this true?
thank you
There are three major versions of Windows 7: 32-bit (x86) and 64-bit
(x64) and IA64.
What is the third one - I mean, how does it differ from the other two?
[]
A lot of legacy software contains or is 16-bit based. Windows 7 64-bit
only supports 32-bit and 64-bit.
Why? I don't mean technically why - I'm sure you can tell me that
(incompatible file versions and so on), I just mean why was that
decision made? Like Maurizio, I am puzzled by it.
Likely, it was because the additional layer of code required to support
it was too much bloat (heh - now there's a thought, MS thinking a
feature might add too much bloat!), especially for the relatively few
users who actually need it.
That, or just wanting to make a cleaner break - legacy support is a
major impediment to future growth.
As a result, Windows 7 64-bit ONLY uses the latest version of
Microsoft Virtual PC.
HOWEVER, if you install Windows 7 32-bit, you can install Microsoft
Virtual PC 2007 for legacy OS's, you can install XP, Windows Millenium
and 98, AND MS-DOS 6.22.
In particular, that puzzles me. Even if there is some reason not to
support legacy software in the underlying OS, not supporting it via an
emulator seems a`_very_ odd decision, bordering on the vindictive!
I think either MJR mis-spoke or you misunderstood.
Windows 7 64-bit Pro / Enterprise (and Ultimate, I think I forgot that
in earlier posts) all support XP mode, which runs a 32-bit version of
XP, which will run 16-bit and balky 32-bit software just fine. Also,
the latest version of MS Virtual PC can run XP 32-bit, with the same
capabilities.
Finally, if you are running a 32-bit version of Windows 7, you don't
need the emulator / virtual machine at all, it will run most XP-
compatible 32-bit and most 16-bit software just fine without an
emulator / virtual machine.
Zaphod, Sorry, I didn't misspeak.
I have 5-PC's set-up my house. I am such a geek. /sigh
Only 5? You have much to learn, grasshopper.
or another since 1985. These are just the systems I consider worth the
effort to keep running.
I have a couple more out in the Garage though. 2-Commodore VIC-20's
and a 64. I have game cartridges and expansion cards and an old color
TV that was used for a monitor. LOL.
I used to set the VIC-20 up for the kids when they were toddlers.
didn't translate well into the text medium we are using. Must remember
to use emoticons...
Hard to say, again, I've not run into any software that ran under 32-Interesting, I didn't have any luck getting a lot of my older legacy
stuff to run. Could be that some of my really old programs are a combo
of 8/16 bit or 16/32 bit programming, and XP-Mode arbitrarily decides
they won't run? I get messages indicating 'wrong version' of operating
system when it checks for requirements in its compatible software
database?
bit XP that won't run under XP Mode. YMMV (and apparently does).
XP-Mode is designed for Win 7 Pro+ x-64 or IA64, 64-bit versions.
No, XP Mode is designed to allow software to work that isn't compatible
with the new security model used in Windows 7. It is available in both
32 and 64-bit versions of Windows 7. Again, I know, because we use it.
For the 32-bit version, you have to use Virtual PC 2004 or 2007, and
install the OS you want to use.
You certainly can do this, but you don't have to use Virtual PC 2004 or
2007, XP Mode is available and handles the licensing issue that most
non packrat^H^H^H^H^H^H^H software historians would encounter.
Agreed, that is a benefit of the full Virtual PC, for those who haveSince I have legacy OS's all the way
back to MS-DOS 5.0, I can pretty much install w/e I want.
the OS licenses available.
Yeah, Win 98/98SE was the last version that the gui ran on top of DOS.
As I said, if you catch the screen just right, it displays...'NT
kernel' loaded... Too bad I've never been able to get a screen shot
since it during the boot.
I'll need proof for that claim, since as I understand the architecture
it cannot be the case.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me#Relation_to_other_Windows_relea
ses, where it says:
"Windows Me is in fact derived from the older, monolithic MS-DOS
codebase (Windows 4.x) while Windows 2000 is the first of the NT 5.0
family"
and
"Windows Me was the last operating system to be based on the Windows 9x
(monolithic) kernel and MS-DOS."
While Windows ME lacked Real Mode support and was fully 32-bit, it was
not based on the NT kernel.
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.