Running a Virtual PC Windows 2000 session on an XP machine

Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

I'm replacing my kids Windows 2000 machine with a Dell running XP Home.
I imagine I may run into problems getting some of their older games to
work on XP. If I do, I'm thinking of installing Virtual PC 2004 and
running those games in a Windows 2000 guest OS. Has anyone tried this
scenario and do you have any suggestions worth mentioning? Thanks.
21 answers Last reply
More about running virtual windows 2000 session machine
  1. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Rob Stow wrote:
    > tron9901@msn.com wrote:
    > > I'm replacing my kids Windows 2000 machine with a Dell running XP
    Home.
    > > I imagine I may run into problems getting some of their older games
    to
    > > work on XP. If I do, I'm thinking of installing Virtual PC 2004 and
    > > running those games in a Windows 2000 guest OS. Has anyone tried
    this
    > > scenario and do you have any suggestions worth mentioning? Thanks.
    > >
    >
    > While I can't comment on Virtual PC 2004, I have used several
    > versions of VMWare.
    >
    > With VMWare, things that are RAM and CPU bound run just a little
    > bit slower in a guest OS (in a virtual machine) than they run on
    > the host OS. However, video-card heavy tasks run a *lot* slower
    > - whether you are playing games or using CAD/CAM apps. I would
    > expect Virtual PC to have much the same effect.
    >
    > I would suggest that you first do as others have suggested: try
    > the games with XP and see if they run well. If they don't, then
    > simply add W2K to the system so that the user has the choice of
    > booting into W2K for those games that don't like XP - no virtual
    > machines required.

    So you're recommending (if necessary) a dual-boot configuration then?
    I've never set one of those up, so I have some basic questions. XP will
    already be installed; can I then install W2K alongside it? Will I need
    a separate hard drive partition (hello Partition Magic) in order to do
    so? Thanks.
  2. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    XP is MORE likely to be able to run said games than 2000 was.

    tron9901@msn.com wrote:

    > I'm replacing my kids Windows 2000 machine with a Dell running XP Home.
    > I imagine I may run into problems getting some of their older games to
    > work on XP. If I do, I'm thinking of installing Virtual PC 2004 and
    > running those games in a Windows 2000 guest OS. Has anyone tried this
    > scenario and do you have any suggestions worth mentioning? Thanks.
    >
  3. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    tron9901@msn.com wrote:
    > I'm replacing my kids Windows 2000 machine with a Dell running XP Home.
    > I imagine I may run into problems getting some of their older games to
    > work on XP. If I do, I'm thinking of installing Virtual PC 2004 and
    > running those games in a Windows 2000 guest OS. Has anyone tried this
    > scenario and do you have any suggestions worth mentioning? Thanks.
    >

    While I can't comment on Virtual PC 2004, I have used several
    versions of VMWare.

    With VMWare, things that are RAM and CPU bound run just a little
    bit slower in a guest OS (in a virtual machine) than they run on
    the host OS. However, video-card heavy tasks run a *lot* slower
    - whether you are playing games or using CAD/CAM apps. I would
    expect Virtual PC to have much the same effect.

    I would suggest that you first do as others have suggested: try
    the games with XP and see if they run well. If they don't, then
    simply add W2K to the system so that the user has the choice of
    booting into W2K for those games that don't like XP - no virtual
    machines required.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On 1 Apr 2005 10:58:17 -0800, tron9901@msn.com wrote:


    >So you're recommending (if necessary) a dual-boot configuration then?
    >I've never set one of those up, so I have some basic questions. XP will
    >already be installed; can I then install W2K alongside it? Will I need
    >a separate hard drive partition (hello Partition Magic) in order to do
    >so? Thanks.

    Hey Einstein, any game that runs on Win2K is going to run on XP. XP is
    Win2K with a *slightly* updated kernel and snazzy GUI is all. Plus it
    has better backwards compatibility for games built into it already.
    Don't sweat it.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 12:25:11 -0800, Redmond du Barrymond
    <redmond@STUFFIT.invalid> wrote:

    >On 1 Apr 2005 10:58:17 -0800, tron9901@msn.com wrote:
    >
    >
    >>So you're recommending (if necessary) a dual-boot configuration then?
    >>I've never set one of those up, so I have some basic questions. XP will
    >>already be installed; can I then install W2K alongside it? Will I need
    >>a separate hard drive partition (hello Partition Magic) in order to do
    >>so? Thanks.
    >
    >Hey Einstein, any game that runs on Win2K is going to run on XP. XP is
    >Win2K with a *slightly* updated kernel and snazzy GUI is all. Plus it
    >has better backwards compatibility for games built into it already.
    >Don't sweat it.

    Haha...I just realized we have been had by an April Fools joke.
  6. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    From what I understand, they are recommending that you first try
    the games on the new XP system and then only and ONLY if you
    have problems consider some other alternative.

    Good luck!
    Saga

    <tron9901NO@SPAMmsn.com> wrote in message
    news:1112381896.962244.260760@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > Rob Stow wrote:
    >> tron9901@msn.com wrote:
    >> > I'm replacing my kids Windows 2000 machine with a Dell running XP
    > Home.
    >> > I imagine I may run into problems getting some of their older games
    > to
    >> > work on XP. If I do, I'm thinking of installing Virtual PC 2004 and
    >> > running those games in a Windows 2000 guest OS. Has anyone tried
    > this
    >> > scenario and do you have any suggestions worth mentioning? Thanks.
    >> >
    >>
    >> While I can't comment on Virtual PC 2004, I have used several
    >> versions of VMWare.
    >>
    >> With VMWare, things that are RAM and CPU bound run just a little
    >> bit slower in a guest OS (in a virtual machine) than they run on
    >> the host OS. However, video-card heavy tasks run a *lot* slower
    >> - whether you are playing games or using CAD/CAM apps. I would
    >> expect Virtual PC to have much the same effect.
    >>
    >> I would suggest that you first do as others have suggested: try
    >> the games with XP and see if they run well. If they don't, then
    >> simply add W2K to the system so that the user has the choice of
    >> booting into W2K for those games that don't like XP - no virtual
    >> machines required.
    >
    > So you're recommending (if necessary) a dual-boot configuration then?
    > I've never set one of those up, so I have some basic questions. XP
    > will
    > already be installed; can I then install W2K alongside it? Will I need
    > a separate hard drive partition (hello Partition Magic) in order to do
    > so? Thanks.
    >
  7. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On 1 Apr 2005 09:43:17 -0800, tron9901@msn.com wrote:

    >I'm replacing my kids Windows 2000 machine with a Dell running XP Home.
    >I imagine I may run into problems getting some of their older games to
    >work on XP. If I do, I'm thinking of installing Virtual PC 2004 and
    >running those games in a Windows 2000 guest OS. Has anyone tried this
    >scenario and do you have any suggestions worth mentioning? Thanks.

    Why not wait until you actually find any problems? XP is probably
    better at running older games than 2000.
    --
    Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    >From my testing of over 1600 games Windows XP should be able to run all
    of the games that Windows 2000 does and vice versa.

    About less than a dozen games only run on Windows 2000 and the same for
    Windows XP that don't work on the other OS. These are very few however.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 12:58:51 -0800, Redmond du Barrymond
    <redmond@STUFFIT.invalid> wrote:

    >Haha...I just realized we have been had by an April Fools joke.

    If it was, the OP forgot the joke part.
    --
    Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
  10. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 21:22:18 GMT, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote:


    >If it was, the OP forgot the joke part.

    OK, it was a troll then. Look at the other groups he cross-posted to.
  11. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On 1 Apr 2005 19:08:01 -0800, "DosFreak" <d0sfreak@yahoo.com> wrote:


    >About less than a dozen games only run on Windows 2000 and the same for
    >Windows XP that don't work on the other OS. These are very few however.

    I would like to know what dozen games run on Win2K but not XP. I don't
    believe you. Win2K and XP are the same OS.
  12. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Redmond du Barrymond wrote:
    > Win2K and XP are the same OS.

    No they aren't.

    XP is based on 2k but they are not the same thing

    --
    Alex

    Hermes: "We can't afford that! Especially not Zoidberg!"
    Zoidberg: "They took away my credit cards!"

    www.drzoidberg.co.uk
    www.sffh.co.uk
    www.ebayfaq.co.uk
  13. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 09:07:36 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
    <AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:


    >No they aren't.

    We going to play the Monty Python game here?

    >XP is based on 2k but they are not the same thing

    They are both NT. XP kernel is just a slightly updated one from the
    kernel in Win2K. What you are saying is like saying that Mandrake 10
    is not the same OS as Mandrake 10.1. *Any* game that runs on Win2K is
    going to run on XP. FACT.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    "*Any* game that runs on Win2K is
    going to run on XP. FACT. "

    No, not necessarily. There are differences in the NTVDM between 2K/XP
    that allows some games to work in the 2 operating systems that do not
    work in the other. You can't really tell the differences in NTVDM
    between the 2 anymore from my NT Game Compatibility List since I
    switched from using NTVDM to DosBox for all REAL mode games since
    DosBox is better suited and supported to running REAL mode DOS games
    than NTVDM.

    There are also some Windows games that work in one OS that don't work
    in the other but I haven't actually tracked down the reasons why yet.

    Check out my list here: http://vogons.zetafleet.com/viewtopic.php?t=465

    It's not perfect, I'm only human but all games are tested by me and
    I've tried to be as objective as possible.

    As you can see over time I've gone from a strict compatibility
    comparison (No Scummvm, DosBox, ports, etc) to focusing more on easier
    gameplay and no focusing on compatibility differences between the OS's,
    but I can assure you that the differences in gaming compatibility
    between 2000 and XP are so slight as to pretty much be no factor at all.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    >*Any* game that runs on Win2K is
    > going to run on XP. FACT.

    That's not quite true, there quite a few differences in the shell and some
    of the other systems like security, so there's no way to make a blanket
    statement like that, but as you suggest *most* games should run on XP if
    they ran on W2K.

    --
    Bob Comer


    "Redmond du Barrymond" <redmond@STUFFIT.invalid> wrote in message
    news:66nt415sh0suu3t25d0bijkr16qj9p79lr@4ax.com...
    > On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 09:07:36 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
    > <AlexNOOOOO!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>No they aren't.
    >
    > We going to play the Monty Python game here?
    >
    >>XP is based on 2k but they are not the same thing
    >
    > They are both NT. XP kernel is just a slightly updated one from the
    > kernel in Win2K. What you are saying is like saying that Mandrake 10
    > is not the same OS as Mandrake 10.1. *Any* game that runs on Win2K is
    > going to run on XP. FACT.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 19:05:27 -0400, "Robert Comer"
    <bobcomer-removeme-@mindspring.com> wrote:


    >I believe others have answered that question. (I don't play many games.)

    No one has answered that question yet.

    >Anyway, like Steve Jain said, this is WAY off topic for Virtual PC.

    Sorry, but the OP cross-posted to a bunch of groups. I'm posting from
    a gaming group.
  17. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    > No one has answered that question yet.

    Not in your gaming group, but Steve Jain answered it in the Virtual PC
    group. Shogo is the game he mentioned and the problem was erratic mouse in
    XP. And DosFreak posted a link to his list of games, and while there aren't
    many that do run under W2K but not XP, there are some.

    > Sorry, but the OP cross-posted to a bunch of groups. I'm posting from
    > a gaming group.

    Understood.

    --
    Bob Comer


    "Redmond du Barrymond" <redmond@STUFFIT.invalid> wrote in message
    news:1jd151tuse66eneahujdikq5ombpg2emt9@4ax.com...
    > On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 19:05:27 -0400, "Robert Comer"
    > <bobcomer-removeme-@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I believe others have answered that question. (I don't play many games.)
    >
    > No one has answered that question yet.
    >
    >>Anyway, like Steve Jain said, this is WAY off topic for Virtual PC.
    >
    > Sorry, but the OP cross-posted to a bunch of groups. I'm posting from
    > a gaming group.
    >
  18. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 09:20:34 -0400, "Robert Comer"
    <bobcomer_removeme@mindspring.com> wrote:


    >Not in your gaming group, but Steve Jain answered it in the Virtual PC
    >group. Shogo is the game he mentioned and the problem was erratic mouse in
    >XP. And DosFreak posted a link to his list of games, and while there aren't
    >many that do run under W2K but not XP, there are some.

    OK, I stand corrected than. But did he try a compatibility mode to
    possiby fix it? I didn't download that list because it was an .exe
    file.
  19. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Robert Comer wrote:

    > Not in your gaming group, but Steve Jain answered it in the Virtual PC
    > group. Shogo is the game he mentioned and the problem was erratic
    > mouse in XP.

    That wasn't limited to XP. I had the erratic mouse problem also in Windows
    2000...

    Benjamin
  20. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 21:09:46 +0200, "Benjamin Gawert" <bgawert@gmx.de>
    wrote:


    >That wasn't limited to XP. I had the erratic mouse problem also in Windows
    >2000...
    >
    >Benjamin
    >
    Aha! Still no concrete evidence then. :-)
  21. Archived from groups: alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.virtualpc,microsoft.public.win2000.general,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Try this SHOGO Faq: http://www.shogo-mad.com/faq/shogo.htm

    The "evidence" is in my list up above. I could manually go through all
    the games and list the differences and post them but what's the point?
    There would still be no proof to back it up. The closest thing your
    going to get is my list, which even though it's on a .xls, doesn't mean
    it's true.
Ask a new question

Read More

Virtual PC Windows 2000 Games Microsoft Windows XP Windows