Coming Soon: Windows XP Mode and Windows Virtual PC

[GomJabbar]

Windows XP Mode is specifically designed to help small businesses move to Windows 7. Windows XP Mode provides you with the flexibility to run many older productivity applications on a Windows 7 based PC.

All you need to do is to install suitable applications directly in Windows XP Mode which is a virtual Windows XP environment running under Windows Virtual PC. The applications will be published to the Windows 7 desktop and then you can run them directly from Windows 7.

Windows XP Mode and Windows Virtual PC are best experienced on your new Windows 7 PC. We will be soon releasing the beta of Windows XP Mode and Windows Virtual PC for Windows 7 Professional and Windows 7 Ultimate.

Coming Soon: Windows XP Mode and Windows Virtual PC

Microsoft is adding a "Windows XP Mode" to Windows 7, in a move to encourage users to make the switch to the software vendor's forthcoming operating system.

The firm has built its XP mode into Windows 7 by using the Windows Virtual PC technology Microsoft acquired in 2003, to make the OS compatible to run apps designed for Vista's predecessor.

Windows 7 gets built in XP mode

[GomJabbar]

Here is more on this story...

So why is XP Mode a big deal? It’s not the technology, it’s the licensing. For Windows Vista, Microsoft allows customers running Enterprise edition under a volume license to run up to four virtual machines with the same Windows license (downgrade rights mean the VM can run an earlier version of Windows like XP Professional). Everyone else (yes, I’m looking at the entire small business sector here), you need to buy a separate XP license to run in that VM. That’s a lot of money to pay just to run one incompatible app.

For Windows 7, Microsoft has removed that objection. If you buy Windows 7 Professional, you get the right to download and use a licensed copy of XP, neatly packaged in a VHD and ready to run in the XP Mode environment.
---------------------------------
Strictly speaking, it doesn’t seem accurate to call this a feature of Windows 7. Microsoft says that the XP Mode bits will not be included as part of the Windows 7 RTM package. Instead, XP Mode will be “available either through pre-installation by your PC manufacturer or via a no cost download.” That’s a smart decision. The VHD uses up a large chunk of disk space, and most customers won’t need it. It also buys extra time for development, in much the same way that Hyper-V lagged the initial release of Windows Server 2008.

Why all the fuss over XP Mode?

[jdhurst]

I read that. I wonder if Microsoft will have the brains to give people like me who have VMware and will never use Virtual PC (it has never proven to be a VMware knockoff) a copy of XP as well. Probably not. Microsoft has completely stopped thinking like business people. Vista proved that and now Windows 7 is going to keep up. What I keep reading over and over again is that it is a consumer OS for gaming and not a lot more. Once again, I shall have to take my handy corkscrew and rip the guts and heart out of Windows 7. ... JDH

[donzoomik]

Virtual PC vs VMWare (ESXi)? Wrong comparison. Hyper-V vs VMWare would be more appropriate.
Virtual PC is simple desktop virtualisation system. I have extensively used it already to virtualize incompactible applications (9x only or require administrative privileges). It's quite small, fast enough, free and easy to use for end-user. So it completely fulfils it's role.

Complete integration would make things even better.

[tomh009]

I read that. I wonder if Microsoft will have the brains to give people like me who have VMware and will never use Virtual PC (it has never proven to be a VMware knockoff) a copy of XP as well. Probably not. Microsoft has completely stopped thinking like business people. Vista proved that and now Windows 7 is going to keep up. What I keep reading over and over again is that it is a consumer OS for gaming and not a lot more. Once again, I shall have to take my handy corkscrew and rip the guts and heart out of Windows 7. ... JDH

I think not -- they are not viewing it as a generic virtualization licensing initiative, just as a robust way to offer full XP compatibility on Windows 7. For full virtualization, you will still need Hyper-V or VMWare, plus the appropriate OS licensing.

[Marin85]

VMware vs. Hyper-V quite an interesting reading. The point with Hyper-V is whether M$ is going to make it available as a separate product or are they going to release a Server version of Windows 7, Server 7 to substitute Server 2008? I doubt it.

BTW, under Vista VMware workstation runs my slightly "editted" XP fast as hell, haven´t tried VirtualPC under Vista, but under Win 7 there is some slight, but noticeable performance degradation (same applies for linux VMs), which is actually understandable as the current version of VMware workstation is not specifically designed for Win 7 (but it runs OK). For that matter, under Win 7, VirtualPC seems to run this same XP VM "faster" than VMware.

Just my enthusiastic experience

Marin

[donzoomik]

VMware vs. Hyper-V quite an interesting reading. The point with Hyper-V is whether M$ is going to make it available as a separate product or are they going to release a Server version of Windows 7, Server 7 to substitute Server 2008? I doubt it.

Server version of W7 is 2008 R2. Hyper-V has been a standalone product for some time, for free. I've also tested Hyper-V R2 in 2008 R2. Well, it's better than in 2008.

[Marin85]

Regarding 2008 R2, I have to admit I haven´t been following the updates there for quite a while now, but it would be definitely something to try. As for Hyper-V, it´s true it´s a standalone product (my comment above wasn´t very clear ) and for free, but I was rather referring to the fact that one still has buy Windows 2008 or management software for it as stated in the above article.

[hsjC]

I never liked hyper-v, I think the graphics are too slow compared to vmware workstation.

[jjesusfreak01]

VirtualPC with XP mode runs a little quicker than previous versions of VPC, but its biggest advantage is the shell integration. It does what it says, letting you launch XP apps within W7 in their own windows. It probably is not as fast as VMware, and the integration is nothing like Fusion or Parallels, but it gets the job done. Makes you wonder though, MS really could have spent a little more time on it to at least get non-3D apps running at about native speed. Anyways, its pretty cool, and certainly an upgrade from VPC 2007.

[Marin85]

I have just watched Parallels 4.0 demo video on their website. It seems to run windows as guest faster than my ThinkPad runs windows as host All I can say is I´m impressed by the degree of integration into OS they have achieved in this product

[tomh009]

I never liked hyper-v, I think the graphics are too slow compared to vmware workstation.

I don't think graphics performance was the primary design goal for Hyper-V ...

[Temetka]

Has anyone here used VirtualBox?

It's a free download from Sun.

http://www.virtualbox.org/

[dsvochak]

Now available to download:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtua ... nload.aspx

[vital-analitix]

Have tried them all and have finally settled on VMware. Reason?

I need a reliable upgrade path which allows me to upgrade the existing XP installation since I need to maintain a license for some software. (dated product and the license checks the "hardware" so it cannot be installed on another PC in native format without getting another license)

The other advantage is that I can move my virtual machine from Windows onto a Linux machine.

I lament that VMware cannot be installed on a Solaris host (Solaris can only be installed inside Vmware as guest). Hopefully that will change now that Oracle has bought Sun.

vital analitix

[vital-analitix]

Has anyone here used VirtualBox?

It's a free download from Sun.

http://www.virtualbox.org/

no upgrade path and still too much a beta product.

[WilsonF]

I have Win7RC x64 installed on a T500 with switchable graphics. To my surprise, everything I use - all the Lenovo X64 drivers and applets even including the power management and switchable graphics - worked from as soon as I finished installing the Lenovo drivers/apps. The only thing I don't use is CSS, which gives a in incomaptibility warning if you try to install it.

The only programs that didn't work were some old back-office programs for my workplace that also don't work with Vista x64. Virtual XP solves this problem with Win7RC. VMWare will provide the same function with Vista x64 on the same laptop, but is much slower and frequently jerky. Once Virtual XP is running with Win7RC you don't notice it and it doesn't take up very much of my measley 4GB of RAM.

[tomh009]

Has anyone here used VirtualBox?

It's a free download from Sun.

http://www.virtualbox.org/

Played with it, as well as VMware and Virtual PC, trying to get Ubuntu 8.04 running in a virtual machine. Amazingly, the install failed on each of the three VM types (crashing on Virtual PC, hanging in different spots on VMware and Virtual Box), pretty disappointing for Ubuntu.

Virtual Box seemed OK, but then I only use virtual machines as sandboxes for testing things, not for any kind of "production" use. Notably VMware is the only one of the three that requires a paid licence for desktop usage: both Virtual PC and Virtual Box are free.

[crashnburn]

Interesting stuff. Any updates in terms of which Virtualization platform works best in what scenario?

One thing I'd like to do is "Virtualize" an existing XP installation from an older Laptop 2, to a Guest VM on a Host XP on Laptop 1 (New).
Slowly, get certain tasks done, things and data migrated from Guest to Host.

Any suggestions on that front? Is VMware the only one that can do such a virtualization?

Marin - Do you work for a company by the same name? A friend of mine used to.

VMware vs. Hyper-V quite an interesting reading. The point with Hyper-V is whether M$ is going to make it available as a separate product or are they going to release a Server version of Windows 7, Server 7 to substitute Server 2008? I doubt it.

BTW, under Vista VMware workstation runs my slightly "editted" XP fast as hell, haven´t tried VirtualPC under Vista, but under Win 7 there is some slight, but noticeable performance degradation (same applies for linux VMs), which is actually understandable as the current version of VMware workstation is not specifically designed for Win 7 (but it runs OK). For that matter, under Win 7, VirtualPC seems to run this same XP VM "faster" than VMware.

Just my enthusiastic experience

Marin

VMware vs. Hyper-V quite an interesting reading. The point with Hyper-V is whether M$ is going to make it available as a separate product or are they going to release a Server version of Windows 7, Server 7 to substitute Server 2008? I doubt it.

Server version of W7 is 2008 R2. Hyper-V has been a standalone product for some time, for free. I've also tested Hyper-V R2 in 2008 R2. Well, it's better than in 2008.

[Marin85]

Lol, this was so looong time ago, I don´t even know what I was talking about However (!), for VM software my preferred 2 choices are Oracle (former Sun) VirtualBox (free) and/or VMware Workstation (trialware). I think any of those should do great job for running XP guest on XP host, though you may find VMware slightly more comfortable, because it utilizes direct drag&drop between guest and host (for supported OSes), whereas with VirtualBox one has to create an additional folder where to drop files and then cut/copy them to the other OS. On the other hand side, VMware may be a slight overkill given its total size of 3.25 GB compared to the 88 MB of VirtualBox as well as the fact that the first one is shareware, the second one is freeware.

To address your other question: No, I don´t work for any company. (Do I often sound like an ad? )

Hope this helps,

Marin