XP Mode

[huffman]

I have a small pc with MSI Win PC Atom 1.6 MHz Intel 945GC 1 x 200 pin Intel GMA 950. I have 2 gb of memory. I know it is NOT "Virtualization" capable, however recently Microsoft released this information:

Now, Microsoft has eased some of that pain, announcing a new version of XP Mode that no longer requires hardware virtualization to run.

Microsoft is hoping the easing of XP Mode requirements will encourage more businesses to adopt Windows 7 over Windows XP as their mainstream OS.

I have downloaded the 3 files now supposedly that will all the use of XP on machines not having hardware virualization, but when I run the first of the three files, I get the following"

Update installation failed, Error information - 0x80072EE7(0)

I was wondering had anyone else was having this problem and if there is a solution?

Thanks

 

[Tews]

What version of Windows 7 are you using? Windows XP Mode is only available in Windows 7 Enterprise, Windows 7 Professional, and Windows 7 Ultimate.

 

[logicearth]

Uhh...you do not want to run a virtual machine on this computer...
That CPU will just die under the load. You would be lucky if you can still move the mouse.

 

[Tews]

Uhh...you do not want to run a virtual machine on this computer...
That CPU will just die under the load. You would be lucky if you can still move the mouse.

That too!

 

[huffman]

I have Win 7 Ultimate

Uhh...you do not want to run a virtual machine on this computer...
That CPU will just die under the load. You would be lucky if you can still move the mouse.

I am curious as to why Virtual Machine would cause that kind of problem with this computer?

 

[huffman]

Just to see if I could get Virtualization to work I installed Win7 Ultimate on another PC.
This PC has 2gb of memory, a Gigabyte G41M-ES2L Intel G41 Socket 775 Motherboard and an Intel Pentium Dual Core E2200 2.2 GHz 1 MB 800 MHz CPU.

The install went fine and everything seems to work, so again I tried to install XP Mode. When I ran "WindowsActivationUpdate.exe as Administrator I got the same Error as before.

Update installion failed Error information - 0x80072EE7(0)

I am guessing all the "0's" are zeroes.

Since I got the same error message, I am guessing that Microsoft has not made it as easy they make it sound.

 

[Lee]

First let me say something. . .Forget XPMode. Cannot say that enough. It is without a doubt the worst VM going. Get a copy of either Virtual Box (free) or VMWare's Workstation, or Player. I have a fairly high powered system (see specs), and XPMode just crawls. Finally got so fed up with it I removed it from my computer, and swore that it would never see the light of day again, and that was after three attempts to make it work. :sarc:

 

[pparks1]

First let me say something. . .Forget XPMode. Cannot say that enough. It is without a doubt the worst VM going. Get a copy of either Virtual Box (free) or VMWare's Workstation, or Player. I have a fairly high powered system (see specs), and XPMode just crawls. Finally got so fed up with it I removed it from my computer, and swore that it would never see the light of day again, and that was after three attempts to make it work. :sarc:

After having used virtualization technologies extensively at work and having a ton of experience before seeing XP Mode, the first thing that hit me was it's extremely slow performance. I cannot agree more strongly enough that using other apps is the better way to go. I prefer VMWare Player because it's got a nice utility for converting that free XP Mode install that you are entitled to use when you own either Windows 7 Professional, Enterprise or Ultimate. And with Unity mode, you end up with more or less 2 start menus and have full access to everything on the VM right form within your host machine.

 

[Lee]

Some good information there Mr. pparks1; didn't know about the ability to us VMware's to run the XPMode. Will have to give that a try. Do you have any suggestions as to how to do it other than running Player.
Thanks.

 

[logicearth]

I am curious as to why Virtual Machine would cause that kind of problem with this computer?

The Atom processors are low grade, think old P4 and Celeron processors those beat an Atom in performance. An Atom is also a single core (unless the dual-core versions are already being sold I don't know) have you tried running a virtual machine on a single core 1.6 GHz processor? I have and it was not fun. It was like watching a slide show with every move of the mouse.

 

[z3r010]

Atom 330 dual core with HT

 

[pparks1]

Some good information there Mr. pparks1; didn't know about the ability to us VMware's to run the XPMode. Will have to give that a try. Do you have any suggestions as to how to do it other than running Player.
Thanks.

You can use VMWare Workstation and convert the file as well. As long as XP Mode is installed, you just go to File and there should be an option to convert XP Mode.

Note: This does convert the plain jane clear slate copy of XP Mode..so if you previously had configured XP Mode and installed applications and such..they wouldn't convert using this method.

For Sun's product, I think you have to go through the vmlite process that one of our members here posts about from time to time. I don't particularly feel all that comfortable with that, plus vmware is what I use at work, so I just stick with VMWare Player for my home use as well.

 

[huffman]

I ran across this article and it is the best explaination of XP Mode and VirtualBox I have seen anywhere:

Win 7's XP Mode And VirtualBox: When You Need Windows XP : Introductionhttp://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/virtual-xp-virtualbox,2418.html

The only reason I want to have the ability to run either the XP mode or VirtualBox with XP installed is "PaintShop Pro 7.04". It just will absolutely not work in Windows 7.

If I understand the way VirtualBox works, I will most likely have to increase my memory from 2gb to 4gb to have better speed, which is no big deal.

I wish I were a little smarter (and not an old cogger) to better know things work. I guess I need to visit my PC guru.

Thanks for the help guys.

 

[logicearth]

You can run a virtual machine on 2GB, you just cannot run many, mostly one at a time.
But the CPU is a lot more important....

 

[Dark Nova Gamer]

First let me say something. . .Forget XPMode. Cannot say that enough. It is without a doubt the worst VM going. Get a copy of either Virtual Box (free) or VMWare's Workstation, or Player. I have a fairly high powered system (see specs), and XPMode just crawls. Finally got so fed up with it I removed it from my computer, and swore that it would never see the light of day again, and that was after three attempts to make it work. :sarc:

Sorry to interrupt this thread. But XP Mode crawls for you? Thats odd as I have (aside from the OC) worse specs then you, and even then XP Mode flies. Perhaps its something to do with the iMac or perhaps even the Mac's HDD which uses the GUID partioning scheme. As opposed to a PC which uses a MBR partition scheme.

Again, sorry to interrupt. Just needed to get that out there. In my experience, XP Mode is a good thing to have 'just in case'.

 

[pparks1]

Sorry to interrupt this thread. But XP Mode crawls for you? Thats odd as I have (aside from the OC) worse specs then you, and even then XP Mode flies.

When I first played with XP Mode, I had quite a large amount of experience with VMWare Player, VMWare Server, VMWare ESX/i, and VirtualBox. Thus, when I first saw XP mode, the first thing I noticed was just how slow it booted up for me. It took about 40 seconds to book XP....which might be described as "lighting fast" by some...but I was used to 20 second boots with other products. If you don't have experience with other products, my guess is XP Mode is amazing and all that you could ask for. However, when you have extensive experience with other products...you see things a bit different when you evaluate.

 

[jimbo45]

You can run a virtual machine on 2GB, you just cannot run many, mostly one at a time.
But the CPU is a lot more important....

Actually NOT TRUE -- the MOST IMPORTANT COMPONENT YOU NEED FOR RUNNING VIRTUAL MACHINES IS RAM --OODLES AND OODLES OF IT.

(Capitals intended).

The poster is correct in saying that you can run a Virtual machine in 2GB of RAM -- you can even run one in 256 / 384 MB of RAM (Windows 2000 or even an XP virtual machine will run in 256 / 384 MB of RAM) -- you just can't run MANY concurrent VM's if your host has a small amount of RAM.

In general the CPU isn't a problem on most modern machines these days.

Fast disks will also improve Virtual Machine improvement too.

If you want to run Virtual machines upping the RAM will pay more dividends than changing the CPU for a more powerful model.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[squall leonhart]

XPMode needs to die, its only good for spreadsheets and ancient word type applications.

 

[logicearth]

Actually NOT TRUE -- the MOST IMPORTANT COMPONENT YOU NEED FOR RUNNING VIRTUAL MACHINES IS RAM --OODLES AND OODLES OF IT.

(Capitals intended).

The poster is correct in saying that you can run a Virtual machine in 2GB of RAM -- you can even run one in 256 / 384 MB of RAM (Windows 2000 or even an XP virtual machine will run in 256 / 384 MB of RAM) -- you just can't run MANY concurrent VM's if your host has a small amount of RAM.

Actually IS TRUE. If you read what I said. You cannot run many, mostly one at a time just as you said. In this configuration the CPU is more important then RAM. An ATOM processor for example will choke regardless of how much RAM you have.

 

[Dark Nova Gamer]

Actually NOT TRUE -- the MOST IMPORTANT COMPONENT YOU NEED FOR RUNNING VIRTUAL MACHINES IS RAM --OODLES AND OODLES OF IT.

(Capitals intended).

The poster is correct in saying that you can run a Virtual machine in 2GB of RAM -- you can even run one in 256 / 384 MB of RAM (Windows 2000 or even an XP virtual machine will run in 256 / 384 MB of RAM) -- you just can't run MANY concurrent VM's if your host has a small amount of RAM.

Actually IS TRUE. If you read what I said. You cannot run many, mostly one at a time just as you said. In this configuration the CPU is more important then RAM. An ATOM processor for example will choke regardless of how much RAM you have.

I believe I am enough proof that you can run a virtual machine pretty well with not much RAM. OS X 10.6.3, Windows XP SP3, Windows Vista SP2, Windows 7 SP1 (what? I got bored!) all ran fine for me in VMWare. Of course never tried it at the same time.

Also XP Mode was a slow bootup for me as well but once its started theres really no speed issues for me.