Home > Microsoft > Microsoft Virtual PC 2004 Beta Screenshots Microsoft Virtual PC 2004 Beta Screenshots Eugenia Loli 2003-10-24 Microsoft 49 Comments MSFN has posted a few shots of the upcoming Virtual PC 2004 runtime/emulator PC engine. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 49 Comments 2003-10-24 4:10 am They even support OS/2. I’m impressed. 2003-10-24 4:12 am Virtual PC always supported OS/2, in fact it used to have a special version for OS/2. The eCS guys had special contracts with the VirtualPC guys to release such a version. 2003-10-24 4:21 am I am fully aware that this is in the hands of microshaft but what is the point of this program now that you cannot run Linux, BSD, BeOS … there is no real use for the PC user except for maybe the Mac guys to run WinXP. Anyone know if there will be some way to force linux to work on this? 2003-10-24 4:25 am I doubt they bought it to run other OS’s. They probably wanted the technology to add a legacy compatibility layer into Longhorn. 2003-10-24 4:31 am If my memory serves me correctly it was just until recently that OS/2 was supported as a guest and even more recently as a host. The agreement between SS and Connectix never came to be. It’s sad to know that the OS/2 host version was pulled so quickly off the market. I can’t wait to see the eCS guys alternative to Virtual PC, TwoOSTwo. 2003-10-24 4:45 am I’m sure that it still runs, just it wont make ext2 etc partitions in the disk set up thing – you have to boot it off your own linux CDs/ISOs. Now, MS would be real bastards if they made it impossible to boot from anything but an MS operating system 2003-10-24 4:50 am If you go to the site, you will see that linux is indeed listed (says it only needs 64mb of ram), as is Novell NetWare 6 and I even saw OS/2 I think, of course microsoft won’t list these things within the app, instead simply stating “other” for such OS’s… Its a full PC in an application, works exactly like booting up a new computer when you start a virtual PC, even including a BIOS etc. 2003-10-24 5:08 am I just installed the 44-day free trial and it lets you create virtual PCs with a huge list of OS types pre-specified. Including linux and bsd. Is this a different version? I’m about to reboot and try installing mandrake on it. The software seems extremely easy to use and configurable, though I can’t compare it to previous versions of Virtual PC, as I never used them. 2003-10-24 5:24 am I just installed the 44-day free trial and it lets you create virtual PCs with a huge list of OS types pre-specified. Including linux and bsd. Is this a different version? I’m about to reboot and try installing mandrake on it. The software seems extremely easy to use and configurable, though I can’t compare it to previous versions of Virtual PC, as I never used them. Yes, this is a different version. This is the original Virtual PC made by Connectix which was bought out by M$. 2003-10-24 6:04 am Hey, this is quite interesting! Since Virtual PC is available for Mac you can run Windows on PowerPC hardware. Who knows if Virtual PC will make it possible for Microsoft to escape from Intel environment in future. 2003-10-24 6:17 am Anonymous (IP: —.ed.shawcable.net): I am fully aware that this is in the hands of microshaft but what is the point of this program now that you cannot run Linux, BSD, BeOS … there is no real use for the PC user except for maybe the Mac guys to run WinXP. Could you ever run BeOS in Virtual PC? I never got it to run. But then, it’s been awhile since I’ve tried. Anyway… I think that you’ll probably be able to set it up to run Linux. It just probably won’t be supported directly. And if for some reason there is no way to run Linux, that would certainly make the product less useful. However, it might be useful in the long run for Microsoft. If a future version of Windows seriously breaks backwards compatibility, they could use VirtualPC to make the new version indirectly compatible with the old versions. I have the feeling that Microsoft is seriously considering doing that, which is part of the reason they bought the product from Connectix. 2003-10-24 6:33 am Im sort of disapointed, though not surprised, that MS moved Linux off of the list of OS types. I mean what were you expecting them to do add better Linux support? Also is it just me? but on Virtual PC 6 for Mac I can never get FreeBSD to get past the stage in it’s install for probing hardware. I’ve ran Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows XP Pro, Mandrake Linux (several versions) & Red Hat Linux 7.2 – 9 just fine. 2003-10-24 7:04 am They just deny that Linux exists . 2003-10-24 7:21 am They live in an ultimate reality denying the truth. 2003-10-24 7:31 am There are reasons to run it. People can now run OS/2, NT 4. DOS, etc on hardware that wasnt meant for it and if it crashes only it will be affected and not the Underlying operating system. Its called legacy support. Microsoft can get people to upgrade and still let them run old apps. 2003-10-24 7:41 am Question: Why in the hell would you want to run Linux inside Windows? If its for more then testing then i do not get it please explain. Windows is obsolute. 2003-10-24 7:44 am Microsoft has removed the Linux and BSD from the wizard and summed them up in Other :-)!!! I don’t think they expect to have any market for the product if they discontinue support for Linux. To answer a question on BeOS, it run on 5.x, but it was quite unstable. 2003-10-24 8:06 am Hi, To answer the question on BeOS support: Yes it works. I use Virtual PC to test websites with different OS. I got QNX, BeOS, Aros, Linux(Rebian/Red Hat/Xandros/SuSe) and all Windows flavours running in Virtual PC. I like Virtual PC even better on a MAC or on a Pegasos. On the Mac I can run Mac OS and in addtion to the above and on the Pegasos you run MorphOS and MacOS. Cheers 2003-10-24 8:29 am >Im sort of disapointed, though not surprised, > that MS moved Linux off of the list of OS types. > I mean what were you expecting them to do add > better Linux support? Why better Linux support? If the hardware is emulated good enough, then any special OS support shouldn’t be needed. > Also is it just me? but on Virtual PC 6 > for Mac I can never get FreeBSD to get > past the stage in it’s install for probing > hardware. I once tried to install FreeBSD on VPC for Win (when it still was a Connectix product) and the istall procedure was veeeerrrrryyyyyy ssllllooooowwwwwww. I decided to abort it. Seems that VPC and FBSD don’t like each other. 2003-10-24 10:30 am I’m now trying OS/2 Warp Connect 3.0 2003-10-24 10:30 am linux support is there. vote with your wallet. buy vmware. you dont need to buy crap just because its from microsoft 2003-10-24 11:24 am The OS/2 version of virtualpc is no longer being sold: http://www.innotek.de/products/virtualpc/virtualpcgeneral_e.html The OS/2 support is designed to help OS/2 users to migrate to XP. Apparently M$ doesn’t want any stinken free-loaded Linux tree huggers moving to XP 😉 BTW, M$ financed VMware ($12 million) in order to squash the growing success of Bochs. 2003-10-24 11:26 am After reading ‘PC Engine’, anyone else had a flashback to the great 8-bit console of the 80s that had a game library with better good-to-bad game ratio than a Dreamcast? Just me then. 2003-10-24 11:27 am Where can i get OS/2 Warp [for free] to try out? Is it abondon ware? 2003-10-24 11:34 am What about G5 compatibility ? 2003-10-24 12:37 pm I hoped MS would have enough common sense not to wreck VPC, but it appears that this is what they intend to do. Is there anybody who can confirm if there are any other hidden “goodies” – like lockout for all non-MS OS’es? 2003-10-24 12:48 pm IIRC, Virtual PC never really had stellar support for Linux to begin with. I haven’t tried it in about a year and a half, but I recall taht none of the ‘extensions’ (ie – drag/drop, etc) worked in Linux. Now with MS in charge, I doubt Linux support will improve much, if at all. I’d say that if you want something like this that runs Linux, use VMWare instead. 2003-10-24 1:08 pm I have installed BeOS 5 on Virtual PC 5 on Windows 2000. It is pretty speedy, and boots real fast. I still need to get a video driver for it. If anyone know a driver that will work, with the S3Virge that VPC emulates, I would appreciate it. Ah memories… I started playing with BeOS on my C600 clone (ppc) Made that 603e Rock… I actually installed it on my 7600 with a G3 300 Sonnet upgrade (need to have 8.6 or below installed or it wont work) Boy did it sing… nice. Real nice. Snappy… Its a shame I cannot find anymore apps for the ppc versioin… 2003-10-24 1:40 pm What the hell, VirtualPC has been around WAY longer than vmware. Connectix basically “stole” the idea from Insignia, a now defunct company that was making a product like VirtualPC since 1987 or so (it was called SoftPC, then later SoftWindows, and then later, RealPC) 2003-10-24 2:09 pm […] Because the Macintosh G5 processor does not support pseudo little-endian mode, Microsoft is rewriting and carefully testing portions of Virtual PC for Mac. Microsoft expects to deliver G5 compatibility in the next full version of Virtual PC for Mac. Microsoft will announce the timing of that release later. […] http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=827904&product=vpcma… 2003-10-24 2:29 pm I bet VPC run’s Linux better than WINE run’s Windows. On the MAC front I believe this is going to allow them to run Office with out having to write a different version. In fact you will be able to run alot of MS apps now on MAC’s. They are going bundle it with Office for OS X. 2003-10-24 2:33 pm Don’t argue with the Microsoft flamers. They don’t really know what they are talking about, and facts don’t bother their arguments in the least. In short, “don’t feed the trolls.” 2003-10-24 2:39 pm Since Virtual PC is available for Mac you can run Windows on PowerPC hardware. Who knows if Virtual PC will make it possible for Microsoft to escape from Intel environment in future. WindowsNT used to run on PPC, but they pulled support eventually. There’s no reason why they couldn’t make XP or Longhorn run on PPC again if they wanted it to, without using Virtual PC. 2003-10-24 2:42 pm On the MAC front I believe this is going to allow them to run Office with out having to write a different version. In fact you will be able to run alot of MS apps now on MAC’s. They are going bundle it with Office for OS X. I doubt it. There’s just not much point to emulating the platform and the OS to run Office when they could just add changes into the existing Office X code. Another method they were considering was porting the .Net platform to OS X and then porting Office to .Net, but I’m not sure what’s come of that. 2003-10-24 2:42 pm Windows NT ran on PPC ? Wow! I thought that it ran on Alphas and x86s only 2003-10-24 2:46 pm Wine does NOT run Windohs Wine -Wine is not [an] emulator It brings Windoh!s API to Linux WINE Is Not an Emulator and GNU’s Not Unix What do you think emulators do? You recreate the interfaces required to get software written for one platform to work on another platform. If you bring the APIs over, you’re emulating the platform, even if you don’t bother doing a complete emulation (emulating the desktop, for example, which would be a waste of time for most applications). A complete Windows emulator would still not run Windows, because you would be emulating Windows, not running it. Virtual PC and VMWare generally emulate the hardware and run the platform on that emulation. Even then, for performance they generally try to make the emulation as thin as possible, going for more of a translation layer than anything else. 2003-10-24 2:50 pm Windows NT ran on PPC ? Wow! I thought that it ran on Alphas and x86s only Go a bit further back. NT3.x ran on PPC and MIPS (MIPS being the first version of NT coded, x86 was 2nd, because the developers felt that if they coded x86 first the cross-platform functionality probably would’ve been dropped). IIRC PPC survived to NT4, but didn’t last very long (while Alpha support lasted until around the time Win2k was about to ship). 2003-10-24 3:15 pm I think the bigger picture is for the Windows Server product line to offer “Virtual Machine Services”, or something similar, “Now you can run N servers, with only 1 Computer!”. I think that is the only reason MS got them in the first place. I am sure there are other reasons, but it just seems to me that one is the most important. 2003-10-24 4:01 pm I think that you are a BIG fan of the BSOD Screen Saver =] 2003-10-24 4:04 pm On my computer WinXP amd 1800+ I have problem installing both VMware and VirtualPC the original version. First I tried to install vmware and it comes to installing network part when it freezes computer. So I thought something is wrong with the program with couple of different versions. After some time I tried to install Virtual PC and again in the middle of installation computer freezes. Other programs install just fine. I am wondering does someone have the same problems and how to fix it. 2003-10-24 4:36 pm Oh great, OSNEWS has just been virtually slashdotted.. 😐 2003-10-24 4:40 pm It’s a done deal MS is going to bundle VPC for MAC with Office. 2003-10-24 4:54 pm that maybe this is how they are going to support backwards compatibility when they release Longhorn. Maybe they won’t try to make all the apps work and just figure that you can buy Virtual PC if you want compatibility. 2003-10-24 5:09 pm I had bought a copy of BeOS 5 pro from ebay (brand spanking new, shrinkwapped and all) and it did not run on VPC 5. It kinda ran under VPC3, but it was slow as a snail and black and white. I downloaded BeOS Max (BeOS 5 Home edition (free) + freeware + drivers for newer hardware) and installed it on a real PIII machine and it works like a charm. I think that under VPC this would also work. Now if only I could install Syllable, AROS, Plan 9/Inferno and a few other free OSes on VPC. 2003-10-24 5:16 pm Here is a list of what I could get to install under VPC 6 (and previews) Windows 3.1 Windows 3.11 Windows 95 Windows 98 Windows ME Windows NT 3.51 Windows NT 4.0 Windows 2000 Windows XP GEM NeXTSTEP OpenSTEP Solaris 6 Mandrake Linux Red Hat Linux SuSE Linux OS/2 v3 OS/2 v4 NetBSD OpenBSD (could not replicate my results though, second time I tried to install it kept crashing) No Luck with the following: Plan 9 Inferno BeOS 5 Pro (solved with BeOS Max) FreeBSD GEOS AROS 2003-10-24 6:14 pm I’ve just recently been doing a comparison between the current Virtual PC and VMWare. Performance-wise, VMWare is miles ahead of Virtual PC. It took me several hours to install Slackware 9.1 on Virtual PC, while it only took 30min on VMWare. And, if you are willing to go with RedHat or Suse, VMWare actually gives you drivers to install on your virtual Linuix pc that helps the performance even more. It really is a wonderful product. (In the past, Redhat has always bummed me out, but I think that the new Fedora version is really top notch – running it under VMWare, I can barely tell it is not the main OS). I think Virtual PC really is a hardware emulator in software. VMWare on the other hand does some fancy wizardry which translates hardware usage by the virtual pc directly to real harware. They end up with very little overhead and it shows. The moral of the story is, let Microsoft have their sorry program. The world has a better solution. Now only if we could convince VMWare to lower thier prices for hobbyists. 2003-10-24 6:15 pm I actually think it is a mistake for the marketability of VPC to not offer support for Linux/BSD. I saw _offer_ as it most likely will support it, just in the ‘Other’ category. I switched back to using Windows as my main Operating System because of VMWare. (Given the combativeness of Linux advocates…Yes, I know I can run VMWare in Linux, but this way I can run Slackware, &c. in VM, and use Photoshop, work with .NET, and play some DirectX games natively in XP.) Anyway, my point is, I find VMware extremely useful as a testing and development tool, and pretty much every version of Windows, as well as Linux, xBSD, Netware, and Solaris are all at my fingertips. Virtualization lured me back to the MS fold, and I think it could other linux users as well; but, why buy VPC when VMWare offers more? I guess we have to wait and see. Whatever anyone else may say, MS has the capacity to turn out some great software, I just hope they don’t cripple it for corporate-political reasons. 2003-10-25 10:51 am “I’d say that if you want something like this that runs Linux, use VMWare instead.” Or a Free (Speech) alternative: Bochs, Plex86, Xen, Cygwin, Mac-On-Linux. 2003-10-25 7:12 pm WindowsNT used to run on PPC, but they pulled support eventually. There’s no reason why they couldn’t make XP or Longhorn run on PPC again if they wanted it to, without using Virtual PC I believe that. But still, most of those thousands applications written in x86 won’t be never compiled to anything other than x86 Windows. They need either native or virtual x86 and Virtual PC technology offers the latter.