Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 94319	2008-10-24 08:32:00	Virtual PC	gary67 (56)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
714463	2008-10-24 08:32:00	Hi all looking at installing MS virtual pc on my XP home, I know officially not supported but do know it works. Question is I want to install Ubuntu (have found the tutorials online and through searching PF1) but is it simple to uninstall V PC and associated files if I no longer want it? Am also thinking of trying Vista on V PC as well. Will installing Ubuntu through V PC affect my windows install if I then delete V PC or will the windows boot loader revert back to normal. Thanks :thanks	gary67 (56)
714464	2008-10-24 08:34:00	You'll have probs getting Linux on VPC. Linux uses 24 bit colour and VPC doesn't support it. Vista will work, but you won't get Aero and it will be slow. You may be better to load Vista onto your main PC and run XP in VPC. This is what I do and XP runs really well (I do have a quad core though :D) Last question - no: Virtual PC does not alter your PC's bootloader at all.	jwil1 (65)
714465	2008-10-24 08:45:00	Personally, I have had problems with Windows Virtual PC, in my opinion Sun's xVM Virtual Box is a lot better, it is also free and open-source.http://www.virtualbox.org/ Linux distros run perfectly with this. (tested Ubuntu, DSL, and PCLinuxOS)	Netsukeninja (13296)
714466	2008-10-24 08:47:00	You'll have probs getting Linux on VPC. Linux uses 24 bit colour and VPC doesn't support it. Vista will work, but you won't get Aero and it will be slow. You may be better to load Vista onto your main PC and run XP in VPC. This is what I do and XP runs really well (I do have a quad core though :D) Last question - no: Virtual PC does not alter your PC's bootloader at all. There are a number of tutorials online which deal with the 24-bit colour issue, including several which have been mentioned on this forum before. Make sure that if your CPU supports it, that you enable "Hardware Virtualisation" in the settings area. Also, give the guest OS as much RAM as you are reasonably able to do so - Vista requires at a minimum of 1gb of RAM. With Windows "guests", you can install the "Virtual Machine Additions" which makes the overall experience a lot better - i.e. seamless mouse integration, resizable window and so forth. I use Virtual PC (and Virtualbox) extensively to test software in a "safe" environment - if anything goes wrong, I can delete the virtual machine and it won't (and cannot) affect my host computer.	somebody (208)
714467	2008-10-24 08:49:00	Thanks all have just been looking at VM ware as well so in everybody's opionion what is better V PC from MS, VM ware or Virtual box?	gary67 (56)
714468	2008-10-24 08:51:00	Personally, I have had problems with Windows Virtual PC, in my opinion Sun's xVM Virtual Box is a lot better, it is also free and open-source. http://www.virtualbox.org/ It depends on what matters to you more. I've traditionally used Virtual PC 2007 a lot more than VirtualBox since VirtualBox was very unstable (and slow) on a Vista host. The latest version of VirtualBox has changed my mind however, as it is just as fast and has some interesting features. The key differences I've found are: - Virtualbox has seamless mode, which makes it look like the two desktops are one - Virtual PC allows you to drag-and-drop files straight onto the virtual machine desktop from your host PC, without needing to go through the hassle of sharing folders and what-not From a usability and performance standpoint, they have been pretty much identical in my experience. Be aware that the fully "open source" version of VirtualBox is missing some very useful things which the "partly open source" version has.	somebody (208)
714469	2008-10-24 08:53:00	Thanks all have just been looking at VM ware as well so in everybody's opionion what is better V PC from MS, VM ware or Virtual box? VMWare (proper) costs money. VMWare Server or VMWare ESXi which are free aren't really suitable for proper desktop use, as they are aimed at servers rather than workstations - i.e. they don't have a lot of the "nice" desktop integration features. Either Virtual PC 2007 or VirtualBox are best suited for someone who wants to play with a desktop OS. I'd suggest you try both, as they each have their own pros and cons.	somebody (208)
714470	2008-10-24 08:57:00	Either Virtual PC 2007 or VirtualBox are best suited for someone who wants to play with a desktop OS. I'd suggest you try both, as they each have their own pros and cons. +1 I'd use VPC for Windows (so you can have the additions) And use Virtualbox for Linux.	jwil1 (65)
714471	2008-10-24 19:21:00	+1 I'd use VPC for Windows (so you can have the additions) And use Virtualbox for Linux. The latest version of VirtualBox now also has additions (the non-open source version), but it doesn't allow drag-and-drop file transfer.	somebody (208)
714472	2008-10-24 19:49:00	Thanks for all the ideas, will install both V PC and Virtual box for windows and also on a spare machine going to try Virtual box for linux and see if I can get it running XP. I just needed to know it wasn't going to do something weird to my system first and that has been answered.	gary67 (56)
1 2 3