Is anyone still using Windows 7?

[spapakons]

That is exactly the imac that I had except I had the 3.2 ghz i3. I even switched it to Windows 7. I lost it though when the graphics card went out. If graphics starts getting flaky be prepared to replace the graphics or lose the computer. I looked into a compatible graphics care and on ebay and they where $75-300 USED. Nope. I never tried XP on it. That model was designed for 7. I haven't had XP as my base since I gave away a computer I built with a AMD dual core processor. Even with that I started using Vista more. I didn't start using 7 as a base until my mac.

I'm still using 7 but I'm considering 10 as the primary OS on a second drive if I can get a copy. I've tried Linux and it just frustrates me. My latest attempt is with elemental OS and although I love the look it seems harder to install software than any other distribution I've tried. I can't get Firexfox esr installed. The instructions I've found fail because they don't allow using repositories. I don't think that I'll ever be able to depend upon a linux os.I don't know how it is now but I found mac more user friendly than any other Unix based OS that I've tried. I haven't used Mac though since High Sierra.

You can download Windows 10 ISO directly from Microsoft. If you open this page from Microsoft Edge, you see only the option to upgrade now or download the Windows 10 22H2 Media Creation Tool. If you open in with another browser, you also see the option to download the ISO directly:

Download Windows 10

You can try using a Windows 7 key to install (without internet connection it should let you do it). For activation you can call Microsoft, tell the representative that your old motherboard died and you had to replace it. If he is kind enough he can guide you to activate. In worst case you will have to buy a new key from Windows Store or elsewhere.

Regarding old versions of Mac OS X, you can use a PowerPC emulator, such as Pear PC to install up to Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard and experiment with the SEVERE limitations of such an old version. I had installed Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger so I could experiment and help a customer of mine that had a real Mac G5. I remember Skype being updated to version 8, but he could not install it on his Mac, so he was stuck with version 6.4 This wouldn't be that serious if he could communicate as usual. The problem was that version 6 was considered insecure and was blocked. So I had to do a little Google search to find a workaround. I had to edit a specific file (Mac OS is based on Unix) to fake the Skype version so he could communicate like nothing changed! This is exactly what I hate in Mac OS and Linux (along with the difficulty to use and software/hardware limitations). Once they get old you can do almost nothing, while even in Windows XP there are a lot of workarounds if one has to use it today, let alone Windows 7 which is much newer. Everyone that has an old version of Linux can confirm that the repositories no longer exist and if you don't have a clue or cannot add new repositories, you are stuck with very old applications (such as Firefox 3) that are useless by today standards. Same in Mac OS. The Apple Store never finds old suitable applications or games for an old Mac OS version and trying to install any new version doesn't let you. Even worse, trying to Google them are VERY rare to find! Novices make sure you stay CLEAR of anything that doesn't say "Windows" on its name. I will say it again, I would rather use Windows 7 on my old computer than install Linux or whatever else. These are OSes to experiment and learn from (if you have the time and will), NOT for a typical desktop computer that the user wants the job done as easy as possible INCLUDING playing games. Admit it, you all play games, if not on the PC certainly on your smartphone. So an OS that cannot play games or makes it too difficult (using Wine) or has limitations (Steam on Linux etc), is not very desirable for general use. I am not talking about servers or programming or Office PCs. I am talking about the average PC we all have at home. For that I recommend Windows only, even an old version like 7 or XP. With Windows you can do anything you can imagine with your expensive PC and appropriate software and hardware. With other OSes it is DEMOTED to a smart typewriter that connects to the internet, plays some videos and SOME games (not all games). You could have bought a much cheaper PC for that. What would you prefer? I prefer to maximize my PC potential, not demote it, thank you. The whole point of replacing Windows 7 on an old PC is to give it more years of life. This will be done if you can install a newer Windows system on it, such as Windows 10 or even 11. Installing anything else makes it much less useful than running Windows 7 and sends it much faster to the dump. This is not what we are trying to do, is it? Think about it...

PearPC - PowerPC Architecture Emulator

 

[ssokolow]

Regarding old versions of Mac OS X, you can use a PowerPC emulator, such as Pear PC to install up to Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard and experiment with the SEVERE limitations of such an old version.

My Power Mac G4 has an IDE-to-SD adapter in it for its boot drive and I've got SD cards for Mac OS 9.2.2, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5... I rarely stick in anything but 9.2.2 because even the 10.13 on the hand-me-down Intel iMac is just "modern OS, but worse" while classic Mac OS is an interesting, different thing, just as AmigaOS is.

(The OS itself is the game I want to play.)

The only reason I even HAVE the SD cards for PPC versions of Mac OS X is the same reason I dual-boot my Intel macs to 10.6... so I can generate test archives for integration-testing The Unarchiver CLI Tools using versions of StuffIt that refuse to run on anything but those specific Mac OS versions.

If I'm going to emulate for pleasure, I prefer System 6 or 7 in Mini vMac, System 7 in BasiliskII, Mac OS 8.6 in Sheepshaver, or Mac OS 9.2.2 in QEMU.

I had installed Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger so I could experiment and help a customer of mine that had a real Mac G5. I remember Skype being updated to version 8, but he could not install it on his Mac, so he was stuck with version 6.4 This wouldn't be that serious if he could communicate as usual. The problem was that version 6 was considered insecure and was blocked. So I had to do a little Google search to find a workaround. I had to edit a specific file (Mac OS is based on Unix) to fake the Skype version so he could communicate like nothing changed!

You're still looking at them as "bad modern PCs".

Vintage car enthusiasts don't keep and maintain things like the Ford Model T for their suitability as working vehicles and vintage OS enthusiasts don't keep and maintain old PCs for their suitability for running modern software and connecting to the Internet.

This is exactly what I hate in Mac OS and Linux (along with the difficulty to use and software/hardware limitations). Once they get old you can do almost nothing, while even in Windows XP there are a lot of workarounds if one has to use it today, let alone Windows 7 which is much newer. Everyone that has an old version of Linux can confirm that the repositories no longer exist

I'm not sure that's a fair criticism. Staying on an old version of Linux and complaining that it's no longer compatible with modern apps is more equivalent to refusing to install the free download to upgrade Windows XP to SP3 and then complaining that applications refuse to run on SP2.

...and it's not as if the Windows Update servers for discontinued versions of Windows are still up either. That's why Legacy Update: Get back online, activate, and install updates on your legacy Windows PC exists.

I would rather use Windows 7 on my old computer than install Linux or whatever else. These are OSes to experiment and learn from (if you have the time and will), NOT for a typical desktop computer that the user wants the job done as easy as possible INCLUDING playing games. Admit it, you all play games, if not on the PC certainly on your smartphone. So an OS that cannot play games or makes it too difficult (using Wine) or has limitations (Steam on Linux etc), is not very desirable for general use. I am not talking about servers or programming or Office PCs. I am talking about the average PC we all have at home. For that I recommend Windows only, even an old version like 7 or XP. With Windows you can do anything you can imagine with your expensive PC and appropriate software and hardware. With other OSes it is DEMOTED to a smart typewriter that connects to the internet, plays some videos and SOME games (not all games). You could have bought a much cheaper PC for that. What would you prefer? I prefer to maximize my PC potential, not demote it, thank you.

That's your experience and that's fair... but not everyone is "a typical desktop user".

My mother doesn't game, but she's quite happy with Linux. I game and I find that Wine tends to have better compatibility with the older games I want to play than modern Windows does... that's one reason that the Windows 7 machine has a Windows XP machine and a Windows 98SE machine to keep it company... because Windows 7 forces me to choose between 64-bit games and 16-bit games, and even some 32-bit games are beyond what Run in Compatibility Mode can achieve.

The whole point of replacing Windows 7 on an old PC is to give it more years of life.

Funny thing about that. The LGA1155 machine that I turned into a gaming rig was choking on Windows 10 when I got it. The first thing I did was delete the hidden file HP's recovery set maker uses to indicate "already made a restore disc set", create a new one, and then downgrade it to Windows 7.

Hell, I have a 133MHz Pentium 1 that obviously can't do modern stuff... but it's very satisfying as a way to authentically revisit Windows 98SE on its own terms.

This will be done if you can install a newer Windows system on it, such as Windows 10 or even 11. Installing anything else makes it much less useful than running Windows 7 and sends it much faster to the dump. This is not what we are trying to do, is it? Think about it...

Again, that's your experience. I'm used to Linux, so it Just Works™ for me day-to-day on my Ryzen. With Windows 10, I'd spend far too much time crowbarring out Microsoft's attempts to monetize me to make it behave the way I want.

 

[michael diemer]

I can't get Firefox esr installed. The instructions I've found fail because they don't allow using repositories. I don't think that I'll ever be able to depend upon a linux os.I don't know how it is now but I found mac more user friendly than any other Unix based OS that I've tried. I haven't used Mac though since High Sierra.

You should be able to install the latest Linux version of firefox, so no need for ESR. Unless of course you prefer it for some reason.

I've come to the conclusion that Mint LMDE is the best Linux distro. It's based directly on Debian, where regular Mint is based on Ubuntu (which is itself based on Debian). So LMDE is closer to the upstream source, namely Debian Linux, than regular Mint. It is very stable and updates are a breeze. You can easily install themes to make it look nice, including some transparent ones. You can even install the signature Basic Windows 7 look, complete with the Windows start menu orb and that famous Windows 7 blue. (No way to get the true aeroglass feel, however. MS just won't release the code, even thought they took it away from us after W7).

 

[spapakons]

What "just works" for you doesn't mean is suitable for everyone. Not everybody has the same computing needs. Like I said, yes, you can do office work and check your socials with ANY OS, but that doesn't make it suitable for general use, for a GENERAL purpose desktop PC. Which OS is the easiest to use for almost EVERYTHING, not only the above two? Which has better hardware compatibility? What has MUCH greater choice of applications and games and are MUCH more user friendly? You know the answer, I am not going to repeat it. Just have in mind that what you like is not necessarily what others like. Installing Linux for them and showing them some basic tasks essentially restricts them in doing only these. If they want to do something more they don't have a clue how and are going to ask you. Their computer is restricted to do only these tasks. I hate restriction, I like choice and ease of use, so you know the answer. No I won't tell you, think about it. I consider upgrading a computer and giving it more life when you improve the current OS or install the next version. Installing anything else with much less features and more difficult to use is DOWNGRADE, not upgrade! I prefer an old Windows version to the latest Ubuntu or whatever. It's not only important to have something new, it is more important to improve on what you already have.

 

[ssokolow]

What "just works" for you doesn't mean is suitable for everyone.

Since you quoted "just works", I'll assume you're replying to me and say that the phrase I'm quoting is what I'm saying to you. Not everyone shares the same priorities you do.

Show me the magic registry entry or other thing which will cause Microsoft to stop nagging about Edge and allow me to only reboot when I decide it's convenient without playing "not now" whac-a-mole, and stop resetting monetization-related settings to what Microsoft wants them to be every few updates.

On Linux, I set up my desktop and it stays the way I want it. Constantly fighting Windows is less painful than, for example, fiddling with Wine/Proton every now and then to get a new game set up.

Sure, it's not perfect, but I'll take 15 minutes of re-removing default applications and fixing my file associations every four years when I bump to the next LTS release over constantly fighting a desktop that sees me as the product, not the customer. Hell, once I get bumped to KDE 6 and, thus, switched to the new standard means of storing file association settings, I'm planning to write a batch file-association-setting tool to make that the work of 15 seconds.

 

[spapakons]

I am just trying to point out that most PC users will find it difficult to adapt to a different operating system. OK, they can see some similarities, like opening Firefox to browse the internet, but they won't like the different interface of Libre Office, for example, if they want to do Office work. Even worse they will try to do something thinking about how it was done in Windows and won't be able to do it. Not everybody has the experience and time to Google for solutions. And if they realize they have to use the dreaded Terminal for over 60% of the cases (and that is an optimistic estimate, I would say 90%), suddenly it feels moving to Linux wasn't such a good idea. I try to warn the average user that doesn't have our experience of using a computer to think twice before switching to another operating system. For many even the change from Windows 7 to 10 or 11 seems a big step. Imagine switching to Linux. Not everybody just browses the internet, they will want to do a lot more like they used to do in Windows 7 only to find out their choices are limited and the difficulty has gone higher. Everyone is free to choose whatever he likes, but don't believe the rumors that the only solution for their current unsupported PCs is switching to Linux. It's not. They can either install a third-party antivirus in Windows 7, keep it updated and keep using Windows 7 (same for Windows 10 after EOL), or they can try upgrading to Windows 11 bypassing compatibility check. Even if their CPU has no SSE4.2 to install Windows 11 24H2, upgrading to 23H2 is more future proof than staying in Windows 7.

PS: For a free Antivirus you can install Microsoft Security Essentials in Windows 7. It is regularly updated with the same definitions as Windows Defender in Windows 10/11.

 

[ssokolow]

I am just trying to point out that most PC users will find it difficult to adapt to a different operating system.

And this all started with me failing to get across to you that I'm not "most PC users" and consider your advice to upgrade to Windows 10 or 11 to be the worst possible option bar none.

This has all been one big tangent.

(Starting in 2002, I I ran nothing but Linux for over a decade, before a 133MHz Pentium showed up in a lot of old machines to repurpose and touched off a fresh interest in retro-hobby computing. Even then, I didn't run anything newer than Windows XP on my secondary machines until mid-2023, when I needed to find a use for a hand-me-down HP prebuilt that was faster than what I was using at the time but couldn't take anywhere near the 32GiB of RAM I was used to.)

 

[spapakons]

Let's stop here the OFF TOPIC argument. To reply to the topic, I am still using Windows 7 at work. Of course we have installed all available updates, we keep Microsoft Security Essentials updated and watch what we click on. There is no reason yet to upgrade to Windows 10 or 11 since we can perfectly do our job with the existing applications including the "old" versions of Firefox and Microsoft Edge for Windows 7. If we ever need to upgrade, I will first consider bypassing compatibility check and upgrade to the maximum possible Windows 11 version. The last thing we want is to replace all our computers.

PS: Compare that to using an old version of Linux from 2009. You would not be able to upgrade most of the applications since the repositories are no longer available or newer versions demand newer Linux.

 

[ssokolow]

Let's stop here the OFF TOPIC argument.

Agreed.

PS: Compare that to using an old version of Linux from 2009. You would not be able to upgrade most of the applications since the repositories are no longer available or newer versions demand newer Linux.

You said that before. See prior response.

 

[spapakons]

Agreed.

You said that before. See prior response.

Yes, most of your life you were using Linux and you are very experienced in it and like it. On the contrary, the average PC user most of their lives are using MS-DOS or some version of Windows and they are familiar with it. They want their change to something new to have the minimum possible impact both in terms of learning and compatibility with existing software and hardware. They ONLY way to do that is to upgrade to a newer version of Windows. The learning curve is much lower and 99% they will be able to use all their old applications and hardware. THIS is the minimum possible impact. Again, let anyone to decide if he wants to switch to Linux. Don't make it seem like their only option. It is ONE option, not the only one, and certainly not the best one. It's the last resort before replacing their computer. In fact I would rather keep using an older version of Windows as long as I can and then replace my computer. I have been experimenting with Linux and I still find it difficult to use and limiting my choices. I cannot recommend it to anyone, that would be biasing.

 

[ssokolow]

Yes, most of your life you were using Linux and you are very experienced in it and like it. On the contrary, the average PC user most of their lives are using MS-DOS or some version of Windows and they are familiar with it. They want their change to something new to have the minimum possible impact both in terms of learning and compatibility with existing software and hardware. They ONLY way to do that is to upgrade to a newer version of Windows. The learning curve is much lower and 99% they will be able to use all their old applications and hardware. THIS is the minimum possible impact. Again, let anyone to decide if he wants to switch to Linux. Don't make it seem like their only option. It is ONE option, not the only one, and certainly not the best one. It's the last resort before replacing their computer. In fact I would rather keep using an older version of Windows as long as I can and then replace my computer. I have been experimenting with Linux and I still find it difficult to use and limiting my choices. I cannot recommend it to anyone, that would be biasing.

You're continuing the off-topicness that you asked to stop.

See my prior response about how this is all irrelevant to where the tangent started from. Linux is the only acceptable post-Win7 option for me and that's what I was saying from the beginning.

 

[michael diemer]

I don't have a problem with anyone going off topic here. Discussing Linux or other operating systems is necessary in this thread, since other operating systems are an alternative to staying on Seven or upgrading to 10 or 11.

I don't see all this as either-or, however. My situation is as follows: I love Windows 7. I think it's the best operating system ever. Unfortunately, after W7 Microsoft has produced nothing but inferior products, which I refuse to use. So I explored Linux. Early on it was apparent to me that I needed to dual-boot. So I chose to use W7 for the one thing I really needed it for, namely my music composition. And use Linux for everything else, as it is safer and is easy to pick up, at least for casual use. This depends on the type of Linux, of course. Some are more user-friendly than others.

After some time, I tried doing my music on Linux also. I found that I could, but the amount of work it took was self-defeating. And there were frequent crashes. Plus, I could not use all the software I used on Windows. Most of it I could, perhaps 90%, but not all of it. But the worst of it was that I needed to use ilok for some of that software. On Windows, no problem, I just keep the dongle in the computer and all is well. On Linux, dongles don't work, so I was forced to keep my licenses on the cloud for some of the software. Which means I had to be online to work on my music. That was the final straw. I came back to Windows 7, and am very glad I did.

So I'm back to where I was when Windows 10 came out (I didn't even consider W8). Namely I dual-boot. I do my everyday browsing on Linux. I'm currently on it now (Mint LMDE). Later today I will go on my W7 machine to work on my music. I keep it offline, but have no worries going online when I want to. I just update MSE. So, 90% of the time or more, my online presence is on Linux. Very safe. and I can use and enjoy the excellence of Windows 7 for my music. I have tried W10 several times, and I always go back to W7. There is plenty of software available fro W7 for my needs. The idea that you have to upgrade to keep up is false.

So maybe we shouldn't think it's an either-or proposition. Dual-booting can be a great solution. Yes, it's a compromise, but one that lets you use one system for what you need it for, and another for everything else. and it is much safer than using an outdated system for everything. It's the best of both worlds. If you use two separate machines, one for each system, there is no danger of one interfering with the other, or overwriting one with the other. That is what I have found to be the best solution, maybe it will work for you as well.

 

[spapakons]

An easier approach to dual boot is to run one OS as host (in your case Linux) and the other as virtual machine (in your case Windows 7 on Virtualbox). You can keep the guest network switched off (disabled) to feel safer. Regarding the USB dongles, you can pass control to the guest (Windows 7), in order to use your music applications. Also if you are using any USB audio card, pass control to the guest. In fact I did the same in order to use an old parallel port Iomega ZIP drive in Windows 10. I installed Windows XP on VMware Player and passed control of my parallel port to the guest. It worked and I could copy my ZIP-100 disks.

In fact it is a good idea to install Windows 10 or 11 on a virtual machine and take your time to familiarize. When confident you can upgrade the host to 10 or 11 and use Windows 7 in virtually machine for those applications (if any) that don't work properly on the new OS. Or for nostalgia, as I do. If you don't like the new look of Windows 10 or 11, you can customize them to look and behave exactly like Windows 7. This is what I did.

 

[jmm]

I didn't read the 34 pages but I hope you won't mind if I insert my little question here...
I have been resisting with Win7 up to now but I can no longer hold the pressure, whence... does anyone know of an ultrabook (say 12-13' screen) with 32-GB RAM? (don't dare ask for 64...)

 

[spapakons]

Here in Greece we visit some large computer stores to compare prices and specs. But well known stores tend to have higher prices, so we use a price comparing site such as Skroutz and www.bestprice.gr So if you have similar price comparing sites at your area, just have a look there. You can visit some known computer stores first, to get an idea, and write down some models. Then search for these models at price comparing sites to see how lower you can find them and if they are available or have to order them. In case of ordering, how many days? Also if the same models are offered without Windows, they are usually cheaper. You can install Windows yourself and use an old Windows 7 key and activate by phone. If Microsoft asks you, just say your old laptop died and you transferred the disk to the new. They might help you activate without buying a new key.

PS: An Ultrabook will be more expensive than a regular laptop. Also instead of buy a brand new, you may consider a refurbished model (older specs but with at least 1 year Warranty from store) at lower price.

 

[michael diemer]

An easier approach to dual boot is to run one OS as host (in your case Linux) and the other as virtual machine (in your case Windows 7 on Virtualbox). You can keep the guest network switched off (disabled) to feel safer. Regarding the USB dongles, you can pass control to the guest (Windows 7), in order to use your music applications. Also if you are using any USB audio card, pass control to the guest. In fact I did the same in order to use an old parallel port Iomega ZIP drive in Windows 10. I installed Windows XP on VMware Player and passed control of my parallel port to the guest. It worked and I could copy my ZIP-100 disks.

In fact it is a good idea to install Windows 10 or 11 on a virtual machine and take your time to familiarize. When confident you can upgrade the host to 10 or 11 and use Windows 7 in virtually machine for those applications (if any) that don't work properly on the new OS. Or for nostalgia, as I do. If you don't like the new look of Windows 10 or 11, you can customize them to look and behave exactly like Windows 7. This is what I did.

I did not know that you could pass control of the dongle to the guest. I suspect it would not work, however. Ilok is known to be very hard to get around. In fact that is why it exists, to prevent tampering. But anyway, even if it did work, I would still have to install a bunch of software via Wine, convert all the Windows vst's to work in Linux; then an update would break Wine, etc. Unless you are a masochist, it just isn't worth it. I wasted over a year in this doomed attempt, and at this point in my life, a year is too valuable to waste. Dual-booting using two separate machines is so easy. No updates for Windows 7, it stays exactly as is, and so just keeps working. And Mint updates are a snap. Besides, I just don't like virtual machines. But others may find your method makes sense for them. fortunately, there is more than one way to peel a potato.

 

[ssokolow]

But anyway, even if it did work, I would still have to install a bunch of software via Wine, convert all the Windows vst's to work in Linux; then an update would break Wine, etc.

I see nothing wrong with your current approach (the "multiple machines" variant is what I do) but, for future reference:

1. The approach they're talking about is using a virtual machine, not Wine... that means literally installing a real copy of Windows 7 into a piece of software which allows you to run one OS inside another. (It's like an emulator, except that instead of running on a CPU implemented in software, Windows 7 will be running at full speed because the virtual machine tool will be leveraging the real CPU's "virtualization extensions" to split the real CPU up into one or more sandboxed virtual CPUs... it's how VPS (Virtual Private Server) web hosting works.)
   
   The only potential complications are making sure the virtualizing GPU drivers are installed in Windows 7 (you're not gaming, so you shouldn't have to worry about the virtual GPU not being advanced enough) and figuring out how to specify that certain devices (eg. your dongle) are assigned exclusively to the virtual machine so they can function the way they would with dual-booting. (Historically, it's been popular for people who are stubborn about Linux and gaming to give one GPU to Linux (eg. their onboard GPU) and another GPU exclusively to the Windows VM so they can use the Windows GPU drivers and the monitor's input switcher and have perfect compatibility and performance on the GPU too... though I think I heard that you need a certain class of motherboard to do that with PCIe devices rather than just USB ones.)
   
   The virtual machine will emulate the video card, mouse, keyboard, audio device, and network card, and that allows Windows 7 to show up in a window inside Linux instead of taking over those things exclusively. Likewise, what it sees as a hard drive will be stored inside a big file on Linux and you use something like Samba/Windows File Sharing to get your files back and forth.
2. Even with Wine, you shouldn't need to convert any VSTs. If the host application is a Windows EXE running in Wine or a virtual machine, then the VSTs should be Windows VSTs.

 

[spapakons]

I did not know that you could pass control of the dongle to the guest. I suspect it would not work, however. Ilok is known to be very hard to get around. In fact that is why it exists, to prevent tampering. But anyway, even if it did work, I would still have to install a bunch of software via Wine, convert all the Windows vst's to work in Linux; then an update would break Wine, etc. Unless you are a masochist, it just isn't worth it. I wasted over a year in this doomed attempt, and at this point in my life, a year is too valuable to waste. Dual-booting using two separate machines is so easy. No updates for Windows 7, it stays exactly as is, and so just keeps working. And Mint updates are a snap. Besides, I just don't like virtual machines. But others may find your method makes sense for them. fortunately, there is more than one way to peel a potato.

What Wine has to do with it? You would be running Windows in Virtualbox, so Wine is not necessary. In Virtualbox and other virtual machine applications you can connect any USB device to the guest (virtual machine). The device will work even if it is not installed in the host (has no drivers). All you need is drivers for the guest operating system. In the case of the USB dongle, Windows should detect it and automatically install drivers. That's the whole point. That's how I used my Iomega ZIP drive. I couldn't install it on Windows 11 (host), so I passed control of my parallel port to Windows XP (guest), the drive was detected and installed the official XP drivers.

PS: in case you didn't understand, when connecting a device to the guest OS, it is disconnected from the host, so it doesn't have to be installed on the host first, as it won't be there, are you physically disconnected it and moved to a different computer. All device data pass directly to the guest OS, the host doesn't interfere.

 

[ssokolow]

PS: in case you didn't understand, when connecting a device to the guest OS, it is disconnected from the host, so it doesn't have to be installed on the host first, as it won't be there, are you physically disconnected it and moved to a different computer. All device data pass directly to the guest OS, the host doesn't interfere.

"disconnected from the host" in the sense that the virtual machine software will disable any attached drivers in the host OS, open access to it for raw I/O, and pass it through the OS in the virtual machine so the guest OS's drivers are the only things talking to it.

The host OS is still technically connected and handling it... but only so far as it's shutting up and acting as a pipe to pass communication between it and the guest OS. (Sort of like what your BIOS/UEFI is doing for Windows once it switches the CPU into protected mode and loads 32-bit or 64-bit drivers... there are stories of network malfunctions on Intel macbooks with Linux where it turned out that, if the OS didn't do the magic handshake to explicitly ask the UEFI to let go of the NIC, the OS and the UEFI would both be trying to talk to it at the same time.)

 

[spapakons]

The point is that once you connect a device on the guest OS, it is not present on the host OS, like you have removed it. That means it doesn't have to be installed on the host first before you can use it on the guest, it only needs to be physically connected to the host and pass control to the guest OS. The host just passes the data from the device directly to the guest without processing them and the guest OS interprets these data using the guest drivers. So in your case, you don't have to install the USB dongle in Linux, you only need to be detected by the guest (Windows) and installed and used there. That's an alternative way to use old unsupported devices without dual-booting. I did the same for an old scanned that had no Windows 10 drivers. I used it indirectly from a virtual machine. If you have enabled copy-paste and drag 'n' drop between the host and the guest, you can save data in the guest and then copy them to the host. Or you can create a shared folder in the host and save data directly there from the guest. In some virtual machine applications you can even run a specific app on the guest on a host window without viewing the whole guest OS, so it is like you run the guest app locally but with much greater compatibility than using Wine to do it. This is called Unity mode in VMware Player. I used that to run Windows XP apps in Windows 7 and higher.