Virtual PC 5.2 for Windows released recently and fixes a number of issues, but it will now only work on the NT/2k/XP/2003 Windows versions. In the meantime, next week, VMWare will begin shipping the 4.0 version of its desktop virtualization software, VMWare Workstation.
Virtual PC 5.2 for Windows Released; VMWare 4.0 Next Week
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
anyone know where I could find a comparison of those two products ?
—
http://homepage.mac.com/softkid/
> but it will now only work on the NT/2k/XP/2003 Windows versions.
Looks like we begin to see the effects of the M$ buyout… win 9x is considered inexistant.
That just sux (but windoze sux anyway, so…)
> VMWare will begin shipping the 4.0 version
I hope they fixed their bug about timing in BeOS…
even if I have a fix it’s always better to get it working out of the box.
See http://clapcrest.free.fr/revol/beos/vmware_BeOS_patching_HOWTO.txt
Well, I would say thank god. It is not once one Windows Me or Windows 98 where Virtual PC doesn’t give a BSOD. Besides, the effects of a buyout would settle in for some time.
but you never know… that could mean we’d finally get decent direct3d support in VPC too.
> but it will now only work on the NT/2k/XP/2003 Windows versions.
Looks like we begin to see the effects of the M$ buyout… win 9x is considered inexistant.
That’s bullsh*t. The first release of VPC on Windows didn’t support Win98 as well. Only Win2k and ME. Later Win98 support was hacked into VPC, but still no Win95 support.
It’s more likely that Win9x/ME support caused more problems.
VPC is intended for pro users / software developers. Those people don’t run Win9x (as host) anyway.
I agree with KAMiKAZOW – and VMWare also doesn’t support Win9x. They want a professional stable product, so they didn’t mess with the little brothers of the Windows family.
Thank God, they made VMWare for Linux 🙂
> VPC is intended for pro users / software developers. Those people don’t run Win9x (as host) anyway.
I know a handful of ‘pro’ ppl who ran those sometime…
anyway it’s true, 9x isn’t an OS, just
(grrrr, stupid tab key)
> VPC is intended for pro users / software developers. Those people don’t run Win9x (as host) anyway.
I know a handful of ‘pro’ ppl who ran win9x sometime…
Anyway it’s true, 9x isn’t an OS, just a DOS extender
> Thank God, they made VMWare for Linux 🙂
Well, vmware for Linux gave me some good complete lockups too
Enough of the MS bashing.
9x isn’t an OS, just a DOS extender
That is a troll, what does that make Linux? Seriously, 98se had to be rebooted often but it was a nice small OS. You could strip it down to nothing, kill all the services and it didn’t have any services that needed to be in Listening state in order to function. My 98se system rebooted in seconds on a slow computer. Software was 3 clicks to install, 2 clicks to uninstall. If you don’t gave Gator, Weather bug, AIM, ICQ, and all the other crap running at boot the system is actually quite stable. I rarely ever got crashes. Linux has come a long way but I would still say it’s slightly less usable than 95 and definitely NT4.
Linux is not an OS, it’s just a bunch of crap loosely thrown together that rarely ever works
I wish Linux the best of luck, but right now it’s like a bloated 95 with a broken installer.
Huh? Windows 9X/ME *is* a windowing system (and more) over DOS — that’s not just an opinion, but a fact. You could very well equate it to X running on top of Linux.
I don’t see how a Windows vs. GNU/Linux comparison has anything to do with the topic at hand.
Actually, without any connection to the internet, I manage to crash Windows 98SE a whole lot – excessive use of Photoshop, Virtual PC, Illustrator, etc. amongst others… wait a minute – all these apps are memory hogs 9I just realize that just this moment… hmmm). This is the reason why I vow I would only use Windows9x/Me only when I’m extremely desperate…
And for the usability of Linux in comparison with old versions of Windows – I would say it is entirely up to what you do. If weren’t for my increasing use of stuff like Office, Photoshop, etc., I wouldn’t be using Windows in the first place. Linux gives me flexibility. Maybe that’s not what you want. There are distributions raging from those made formainframes right down to watches – to just lump it all down to one category is a tad bit unfair. For example, I found Zaurus more intuitive than Palm or Pocket PC (even those I’m far more used to Palm OS).
But if the apps you use aren’t on Linux, nor is there any viable altenatives on Linux – why bother. But how Linux is depends solely on you and your choices. Not very pro-consumer, you may say – whatever. But we are geeks here :-P.
Take a look at the review of both of them at http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1054
I consider using vmware to my virtual experiences… I only use vpc to emulate OS/2 and ecomstation…
Nowdays, vmware has all the features that vpc has… When VPC was released it has some exciting features like cdrom iso support, shared folders, vnc, etc…
But vmware 3.x already supports that.. (shared folders is featuring on the new version – 4)
See ya
Fabricio Lima
ICQ #4060200
VMWare-I use it to run my Redhat 8.0, VMWare is my main VM.
VPC-I use it to run older OSes (OS/2, etc.).
I am a massive fan of VMWare and I am really looking forward to this next release. I mainly used VMWare to give me full support of my hardware when running Linux, using it as an extra ‘layer’ on top of windows. Linux was my OS, windows just provided in drivers! Since then I have gone native but still use VMWare for those Windows on Linux moments.
Huh? Windows 9X/ME *is* a windowing system (and more) over DOS — that’s not just an opinion, but a fact. You could very well equate it to X running on top of Linux.
<p>No, you couldn’t – unless in the last week X has been rewritten to take over the Linux kernel’s scheduling, I/O, memory management and bump the CPU into and out protected mode.
<p>The “and more” part of “a windowing system (and more)” covers just about _everything_ and operating system does except for bootstrapping and a handful of low level operations remaining solely for the purposes of backwards compatibility. Windows (since version 3.x) is a hell of a lot more than just a graphical shell.