Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (
More info?)
You're welcome. The fun part of Virtual PC is that it invites
experimentation because backing out is completely painless.
By the way, a lot of enterprises have legacy programs written in house for
Win95, Win98, and NT4 that prevents them from upgrading to XP on their
desktops or Server 2003 on their servers. Virtual PC and Virtual Server
solve this and allow them to do things like retire old boxes dedicated to
NT4 Server.
"jch" <JCH@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%pZgd.23234$Tq1.7955@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(nojunk)@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:uEJ0B%23uvEHA.908@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> My favorite is SuSE 9.1 Professional.
>
> Mine too at the moment though I have Fedora on my system too, I seldom
> boot into it (Fedora) anymore.
>
>> A lot of posters are not aware of Virtual PC, VMWare, or SVista or don't
>> realize that they almost completely remove the need for a dual boot
>> system or for keeping legacy hardware around.
>
> Agreed. I was not totally aware of these applications either.
>
>> In the poster's situation there is no need to reformat his hard drive,
>> which dual booting with Win95 will require due to the need to correctly
>> install the boot files in the first 2GB on the drive.
>>
>> Dual boot systems can become unstable and you cannot operate multiple
>> OS's simultaneously. Also, the hardware restrictions from a legacy
>> system can inhibit upgrading a dual boot box. The ability to allocate
>> memory for the guest system means that the guest can run without
>> awareness of ram greater than 512MB.
>>
>> My point was that the poster wants to know how to best run Win95 on his
>> machine, not whether he should run Win95 or Linux.
>
> My take was that OP simply wanted to experiment. A good thing to do but
> there are better ways to spend your time than reviving outdated operating
> systems. Still, I and perhaps others, got something useful out of this
> thread and I know that I'll research VPC, VMW, and SV. Thanks.
>
>>
>> "jch" <JCH@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:WEUgd.23150$Tq1.4193@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(nojunk)@msn.com> wrote in message
>>> news:OcDk74rvEHA.3976@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>> The OP wants to use Win95, not Linux. In any case, MS Virtual PC 2004
>>>> would allow him to do both if that's what he wanted to do. I have run
>>>> over 500 linux distros on my pc by running them in VPC. But the OP
>>>> isn't looking for a value judgment on Win95, he is just curious about
>>>> doing it. It is a creative idea that he is entitled to try, but I would
>>>> not do it in a dual boot environment since a less restrictive method is
>>>> available.
>>>
>>> Well ah-dee-da. I'd agree but the OP wants to do this in a dual boot
>>> situation and "is entitled to try." He wasn't looking for a "value
>>> judgement" in his approach nor was he looking for a discussion on MS
>>> Virtual PC 2004. !! Keep trying, and you'll find a Linux distro you
>>> like.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram