Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Virtual PC XP Home running under Pro -- same wireless connection?

Virtual PC XP Home running under Pro -- same wireless connection?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
phpcomhardwarequestion
57 Posts 19 Posters 7 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L Lost User

    It has some bugs.. but I like it what do you mean by 'root' though? I use XP x64 as host..

    D Offline
    D Offline
    DaveX86
    wrote on last edited by
    #39

    That's what I wanted to know...XP 64 as the host :)

    L 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • C Christian Graus

      No,. it's to do with MS forcing people to get XP SP2. It's rarely, if ever, a real requirement.

      Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

      K Offline
      K Offline
      Kevin McFarlane
      wrote on last edited by
      #40

      Christian Graus wrote:

      It's rarely, if ever, a real requirement

      Probably not but I suspect you'll find that MS applications, at least, which specify it won't install unless SP2 is present right?

      Kevin

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • J Jerry Hammond

        VPC2007 will usually use whatever is your default device for your machine. On the VPC console, select but don't start the image you wish to check. Click settings and then select network adapter. You should now be able to select your NIC. HTH

        The world is a stage and most of us are desperately unrehearsed. —Sean O’Casey, Playwright

        A Offline
        A Offline
        alex barylski
        wrote on last edited by
        #41

        That was eventually the fix, yup...I had to select SharedNetwork or somethign and voila everything worked :)

        Blog Entry: 7 Software development best practices to make you more effective and productive PCSpectra :: Professional, Affordable PHP Programming, Web Development and Documentation

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • D DaveX86

          ...while we are on the subject...what works best for everybody?...I haven't tried any of them yet but will be over the holidays?

          M Offline
          M Offline
          Member 96
          wrote on last edited by
          #42

          VMWare Workstation is the gold standard. Nothing else comes even close. We've gladly paid for it for years for testing and development. The others are mentioned a lot here because they are either free or come with Microsoft MSDN subscriptions.


          "It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson

          D 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • D DaveX86

            Yeah, I just replied to the other post, mentioning that I would like to run 64bit XP as the root and all the other 32 bit OS's as the VM's...can VMWare do that kind of thing?...there always seems to be some caveat in the docs...'when the planets align on tuesday of the third month and the second week of the third day and...' ...ya know?

            M Offline
            M Offline
            Member 96
            wrote on last edited by
            #43

            VMWare even allows you to run a 64bit guest os on a 32bit host as long as you have a 64bit processor.


            "It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • M Member 96

              VMWare Workstation is the gold standard. Nothing else comes even close. We've gladly paid for it for years for testing and development. The others are mentioned a lot here because they are either free or come with Microsoft MSDN subscriptions.


              "It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson

              D Offline
              D Offline
              DaveX86
              wrote on last edited by
              #44

              That was my impression, VMWare was the best...free is good though...I like free :)

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • A alex barylski

                I have VP2007 installed on my system running XPPRO I have everything installed and apparently working except... My real system uses a single wireless connection via a USB D-LINK adapter. My virtual OS XP Home does not seem to want to pick this up. Regardless of which USB port I plug the adapter into, no new hardware is found. When I ran the D-LINK installer it warned me about USB conflicts and having to upgrade to SP1 but that is going to be next to impossible considering I have no interent connection until the wireless works. Is there anyway I can get around this by changing parameters in the virtual OS -- IRQ numbers maybe? Cheers, Alex

                Blog Entry: 7 Software development best practices to make you more effective and productive PCSpectra :: Professional, Affordable PHP Programming, Web Development and Documentation

                B Offline
                B Offline
                Brad Bruce
                wrote on last edited by
                #45

                IIRC Virtual PC doesn't have USB support AT ALL

                A 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • D DaveX86

                  That's what I wanted to know...XP 64 as the host :)

                  L Offline
                  L Offline
                  Lost User
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #46

                  Works fine - but be sure to use the AMD64 version of VirtualBox

                  D 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • L Lost User

                    Works fine - but be sure to use the AMD64 version of VirtualBox

                    D Offline
                    D Offline
                    DaveX86
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #47

                    Even if you have an Intel processor?

                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • D DaveX86

                      Even if you have an Intel processor?

                      L Offline
                      L Offline
                      Lost User
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #48

                      Of course.. The differences between EM64T and AMD64 are very small (mostly it's the bugs that are different..)

                      D 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • L Lost User

                        Of course.. The differences between EM64T and AMD64 are very small (mostly it's the bugs that are different..)

                        D Offline
                        D Offline
                        DaveX86
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #49

                        Thanks...I haven't owned an AMD processor since the 286 :)

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • J John M Drescher

                          Hmm. I totally gave up on vmware because of its horrid performance degradation on multi core / multi cpu amd boxes (3 to 5) years ago. I had 3 instances where server class multi core systems would have their guests grind to a halt after running vmware server for a week or so. And the only fix was to reboot the host, which I don't want to do for systems that are to be up 24/7.

                          John

                          M Offline
                          M Offline
                          MrPlankton
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #50

                          Observations and differances; * 5 years is a long time * I use only intel * I deal only with development environments not required for 24/7 operation * I have experienced the same behaviour you describe with vpc * I do bring my hosts down nightly using APC software. I run a script that shuts down all vm's except the domain controller. Then script shuts down the domain controller, then the host shuts down. The reverse process occurrs early every morning.

                          MrPlankton

                          (bad guy)"Fear is a hammer, and when the people are beaten finally to the conviction that their existence hangs by a frayed thread, they will be led where they need to go."

                          (good guy)"Which is where?"

                          (bad guy)"To a responsible future in a properly managed world."
                          Dean Koontz, The Good Guy

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • B Brad Bruce

                            IIRC Virtual PC doesn't have USB support AT ALL

                            A Offline
                            A Offline
                            alex barylski
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #51

                            Doesn't seem that way, no. I had to use shared networking to make it work...

                            Blog Entry: 7 Software development best practices to make you more effective and productive PCSpectra :: Professional, Affordable PHP Programming, Web Development and Documentation

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M MrPlankton

                              vmware is best hands down. I'm running vmware server 1.07 on two virtual domains on older computers. vmware utilized uP bandwidth much more efficiently than vpc. vmware manages disk and network resources more efficiently as well. vmware has a tool called converter which has allowed me to virtualize physical machines which is a life saver. I have used vpc and vmware server (the free products) and there is absolutely no comparison, vmware trumpts u$'s connectex product.

                              MrPlankton

                              (bad guy)"Fear is a hammer, and when the people are beaten finally to the conviction that their existence hangs by a frayed thread, they will be led where they need to go."

                              (good guy)"Which is where?"

                              (bad guy)"To a responsible future in a properly managed world."
                              Dean Koontz, The Good Guy

                              P Offline
                              P Offline
                              Paul Conrad
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #52

                              I second vmware/vmserver. Only downer is it takes a little while to load the virtual hard drive on this machine, but once it is loaded, sweet sailing :)

                              "The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • M MrPlankton

                                vmware is best hands down. I'm running vmware server 1.07 on two virtual domains on older computers. vmware utilized uP bandwidth much more efficiently than vpc. vmware manages disk and network resources more efficiently as well. vmware has a tool called converter which has allowed me to virtualize physical machines which is a life saver. I have used vpc and vmware server (the free products) and there is absolutely no comparison, vmware trumpts u$'s connectex product.

                                MrPlankton

                                (bad guy)"Fear is a hammer, and when the people are beaten finally to the conviction that their existence hangs by a frayed thread, they will be led where they need to go."

                                (good guy)"Which is where?"

                                (bad guy)"To a responsible future in a properly managed world."
                                Dean Koontz, The Good Guy

                                R Offline
                                R Offline
                                Russ T
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #53

                                VMWare Server is great. We use it primarily for testing our products. Being able to click a button when we're finished and having our test environment revert back to a clean, known state has saved me hundreds of hours over the last year of development. The only trouble I've had with WMWare Server is that the "WMWare Authorisation Service" seems to become unstable after VMs have been running for over a week. A reboot of the host (or of the offending VM) fixes the problem. It's not really a big deal for us though

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • D DaveX86

                                  ...while we are on the subject...what works best for everybody?...I haven't tried any of them yet but will be over the holidays?

                                  R Offline
                                  R Offline
                                  RichardM1
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #54

                                  VirtualBox has worked well for me, and is a very small install (like 50 mb vs 500 mb matters when you are adding multi-GB virtual disks).

                                  Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.

                                  D 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • R RichardM1

                                    VirtualBox has worked well for me, and is a very small install (like 50 mb vs 500 mb matters when you are adding multi-GB virtual disks).

                                    Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.

                                    D Offline
                                    D Offline
                                    DaveX86
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #55

                                    So you mean 50mb per virtual machine?

                                    R 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • D DaveX86

                                      So you mean 50mb per virtual machine?

                                      R Offline
                                      R Offline
                                      RichardM1
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #56

                                      LOL! No, I mean the download that you install - the virtualBox program. A 'machine' may be a couple of hundred KB (with no snapshots, GB with snapshots). I drive is at least as big as the data on it, can be bigger, if you add stuff and delete it. ALWAYS TURN ON DRIVE COMPRESSION! (inside the virtual machine) If the virtual drive gets bigger that 50-60 GB on the real drive, host XP Pro SP3 can have delayed write errors. This happens even if the disk caching is turned off. It does not happen with host WinServer 2k3. No clue why it happens, but it trashes the virtual hard drive. edit Oh yeah, always leave a GB of ram free for the host, or things go to crap real fast. /edit

                                      Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.

                                      D 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • R RichardM1

                                        LOL! No, I mean the download that you install - the virtualBox program. A 'machine' may be a couple of hundred KB (with no snapshots, GB with snapshots). I drive is at least as big as the data on it, can be bigger, if you add stuff and delete it. ALWAYS TURN ON DRIVE COMPRESSION! (inside the virtual machine) If the virtual drive gets bigger that 50-60 GB on the real drive, host XP Pro SP3 can have delayed write errors. This happens even if the disk caching is turned off. It does not happen with host WinServer 2k3. No clue why it happens, but it trashes the virtual hard drive. edit Oh yeah, always leave a GB of ram free for the host, or things go to crap real fast. /edit

                                        Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.

                                        D Offline
                                        D Offline
                                        DaveX86
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #57

                                        Thanks for the tips :)

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        Reply
                                        • Reply as topic
                                        Log in to reply
                                        • Oldest to Newest
                                        • Newest to Oldest
                                        • Most Votes


                                        • Login

                                        • Don't have an account? Register

                                        • Login or register to search.
                                        • First post
                                          Last post
                                        0
                                        • Categories
                                        • Recent
                                        • Tags
                                        • Popular
                                        • World
                                        • Users
                                        • Groups