• Welcome to Tux Reports: Where Penguins Fly. We hope you find the topics varied, interesting, and worthy of your time. Please become a member and join in the discussions.

So now we can run Vista Programs in Win7?

C

Cameo

Flightless Bird
Microsoft this week pushed down the KB980846 Win7 update that provides
Vista context for legacy programs. I assume this means that we can now
run most programs written for Vista. This is supposed to work in all
Win7 versions. I just wonder why don't they do the same for XP programs,
instead of forcing us to upgrade to at least Win7 Pro? Is this just so
they can get more money out of us?
 
L

LouB

Flightless Bird
Cameo wrote:
> Microsoft this week pushed down the KB980846 Win7 update that provides
> Vista context for legacy programs. I assume this means that we can now
> run most programs written for Vista. This is supposed to work in all
> Win7 versions. I just wonder why don't they do the same for XP programs,
> instead of forcing us to upgrade to at least Win7 Pro? Is this just so
> they can get more money out of us?

Win7 is built on the Vista code base whereas XP was different stuff.
 
C

Cameo

Flightless Bird
"LouB" <Lou@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:4C2303F6.3030007@invalid.invalid...
>
> Win7 is built on the Vista code base whereas XP was different stuff.

I see. Thanks.
 
R

Roland Schweiger

Flightless Bird
"Cameo"
> I just wonder why don't they do the same for XP programs, instead of
> forcing us to upgrade to at least Win7 Pro? Is this just so they can get
> more money out of us?


There are compatibility modes for XP programs, and Win7 business / ultimate
also have the virtual machine with XP mode.

But Win7 is (kernel-wise, code-wise and generally) built on WinVista,
as you might know, Vista is NT6.0 and Win7 NT6.1
Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively old.

greetings

Roland Schweiger
 
C

Cameo

Flightless Bird
"Roland Schweiger" <roland_schweiger@web.de> wrote in message
news:hvv3sb$lgd$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively
> old.

Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable. XP is still
more popular than Vista. But that's just my opinion ...
 
F

Frank

Flightless Bird
On 6/24/2010 11:23 AM, Cameo wrote:
> "Roland Schweiger" <roland_schweiger@web.de> wrote in message
> news:hvv3sb$lgd$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively old.
>
> Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable.

No, it is a know fact.

XP is still
> more popular than Vista.

And XP has been out much, much longer than XP.

But that's just my opinion ...

But your opinion is not factual.
 
A

Allen

Flightless Bird
Cameo wrote:
> "Roland Schweiger" <roland_schweiger@web.de> wrote in message
> news:hvv3sb$lgd$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively old.
>
> Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable. XP is still
> more popular than Vista. But that's just my opinion ...
And many others. Vista was a leap, all right, but unfortunately not forward.
Allen
 
B

Boscoe

Flightless Bird
On 24/06/2010 8:02 PM, Frank wrote:
> On 6/24/2010 11:23 AM, Cameo wrote:
>> "Roland Schweiger" <roland_schweiger@web.de> wrote in message
>> news:hvv3sb$lgd$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively old.
>>
>> Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable.
>
> No, it is a know fact.
>
> XP is still
>> more popular than Vista.
>
> And XP has been out much, much longer than XP.
>
> But that's just my opinion ...
>
> But your opinion is not factual.



Vista was an absolute disaster for Microsoft.

Many users found their printers, digital cameras and MP3 players didn't
work on it. How processor-hungry it was, making it almost impossible to
use on anything but the newest, fastest computers.

Although a number of problems were resolved by subsequent service packs,
the successful launch of Windows 7 went some way towards repairing that
damage; lessons had clearly been learned, and Microsoft worked more
closely with manufacturers to ensure the upgrade process worked this time.
 
F

Frank

Flightless Bird
On 6/24/2010 12:42 PM, Boscoe wrote:
> On 24/06/2010 8:02 PM, Frank wrote:
>> On 6/24/2010 11:23 AM, Cameo wrote:
>>> "Roland Schweiger" <roland_schweiger@web.de> wrote in message
>>> news:hvv3sb$lgd$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively old.
>>>
>>> Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable.
>>
>> No, it is a know fact.
>>
>> XP is still
>>> more popular than Vista.
>>
>> And XP has been out much, much longer than XP.
>>
>> But that's just my opinion ...
>>
>> But your opinion is not factual.
>
>
>
> Vista was an absolute disaster for Microsoft.

Not really. It was such a change form XP and as usual, most people
resist change.
>
> Many users found their printers, digital cameras and MP3 players didn't
> work on it.

That is simply not true.

How processor-hungry it was, making it almost impossible to
> use on anything but the newest, fastest computers.

Again, that is just not true and you cannot back up that assertion with
any real verifiable empirical data.

Although a number of problems were resolved by subsequent service packs,
the successful launch of Windows 7 went some way towards repairing that
damage; lessons had clearly been learned, and Microsoft worked more
closely with manufacturers to ensure the upgrade process worked this time.

Vista SP2 runs quite nicely, as least on my boxes.
A lot of "damage" was done by MS hating lying linturd asshole losers who
smelled blood and did everything they could pile on, while they could.
7 simply shut the door on them.
 
F

Frank

Flightless Bird
On 6/24/2010 12:37 PM, Allen wrote:
> Cameo wrote:
>> "Roland Schweiger" <roland_schweiger@web.de> wrote in message
>> news:hvv3sb$lgd$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively old.
>>
>> Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable. XP is still
>> more popular than Vista. But that's just my opinion ...
> And many others. Vista was a leap, all right, but unfortunately not
> forward.
> Allen

Vista was a leap forward, but maybe too forward for a few.
Don't forget, 7 is built on Vista, and most everyone loves 7.
 
B

Boscoe

Flightless Bird
On 24/06/2010 8:49 PM, Frank wrote:
> On 6/24/2010 12:42 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>> On 24/06/2010 8:02 PM, Frank wrote:
>>> On 6/24/2010 11:23 AM, Cameo wrote:
>>>> "Roland Schweiger" <roland_schweiger@web.de> wrote in message
>>>> news:hvv3sb$lgd$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively
>>>>> old.
>>>>
>>>> Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable.
>>>
>>> No, it is a know fact.
>>>
>>> XP is still
>>>> more popular than Vista.
>>>
>>> And XP has been out much, much longer than XP.
>>>
>>> But that's just my opinion ...
>>>
>>> But your opinion is not factual.
>>
>>
>>
>> Vista was an absolute disaster for Microsoft.
>
> Not really. It was such a change form XP and as usual, most people
> resist change.
>>
>> Many users found their printers, digital cameras and MP3 players didn't
>> work on it.
>
> That is simply not true.
>
> How processor-hungry it was, making it almost impossible to
>> use on anything but the newest, fastest computers.
>
> Again, that is just not true and you cannot back up that assertion with
> any real verifiable empirical data.
>
> Although a number of problems were resolved by subsequent service packs,
> the successful launch of Windows 7 went some way towards repairing that
> damage; lessons had clearly been learned, and Microsoft worked more
> closely with manufacturers to ensure the upgrade process worked this time.
>
> Vista SP2 runs quite nicely, as least on my boxes.
> A lot of "damage" was done by MS hating lying linturd asshole losers who
> smelled blood and did everything they could pile on, while they could.
> 7 simply shut the door on them.
>
>

Microsofts 10 worst products.

Despite enjoying huge success with Windows 7 and the Xbox 360, there are
several other products that Microsoft would probably rather forget about...

Vista
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/digital-media/5889239/Microsoft-counting-on-Windows-7-to-cancel-out-Vista-flop.html>

Windows Me
Windows Mobile
Zune
Microsoft Ultra Mobile PC
PlaysForSure
Microsoft Mira
Internet Explorer 6
Microsoft Office Assistant
Microsoft Bob
 
D

DanS

Flightless Bird

>
> And XP has been out much, much longer than XP.
>

Sure Frank.....smoke another bowl......
 
J

Jeff@nospam.invalid

Flightless Bird
On 6/23/2010 9:47 PM, Cameo wrote:
> Microsoft this week pushed down the KB980846 Win7 update that provides
> Vista context for legacy programs. I assume this means that we can now
> run most programs written for Vista. This is supposed to work in all
> Win7 versions. I just wonder why don't they do the same for XP programs,
> instead of forcing us to upgrade to at least Win7 Pro? Is this just so
> they can get more money out of us?

You do not need to upgrade to run 16 bit XP programs. Just download
Virtual box and install XP in it. Works very well in my W7 premium (not
Pro) 64 bit.
 
F

Frank

Flightless Bird
On 6/24/2010 3:21 PM, DanS wrote:
>>
>> And XP has been out much, much longer than XP.
>>
>
> Sure Frank.....smoke another bowl......

Typo dan-O, oh...and I don't smoke dope like your butt-buddy does.
Oops!...LOL!
 
F

Frank

Flightless Bird
On 6/24/2010 1:39 PM, Boscoe wrote:
> On 24/06/2010 8:49 PM, Frank wrote:
>> On 6/24/2010 12:42 PM, Boscoe wrote:
>>> On 24/06/2010 8:02 PM, Frank wrote:
>>>> On 6/24/2010 11:23 AM, Cameo wrote:
>>>>> "Roland Schweiger" <roland_schweiger@web.de> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hvv3sb$lgd$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> Vista (and Win7) were a big leap forward, whereas XP is relatively
>>>>>> old.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable.
>>>>
>>>> No, it is a know fact.
>>>>
>>>> XP is still
>>>>> more popular than Vista.
>>>>
>>>> And XP has been out much, much longer than XP.
>>>>
>>>> But that's just my opinion ...
>>>>
>>>> But your opinion is not factual.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Vista was an absolute disaster for Microsoft.
>>
>> Not really. It was such a change form XP and as usual, most people
>> resist change.
>>>
>>> Many users found their printers, digital cameras and MP3 players didn't
>>> work on it.
>>
>> That is simply not true.
>>
>> How processor-hungry it was, making it almost impossible to
>>> use on anything but the newest, fastest computers.
>>
>> Again, that is just not true and you cannot back up that assertion with
>> any real verifiable empirical data.
>>
>> Although a number of problems were resolved by subsequent service packs,
>> the successful launch of Windows 7 went some way towards repairing that
>> damage; lessons had clearly been learned, and Microsoft worked more
>> closely with manufacturers to ensure the upgrade process worked this
>> time.
>>
>> Vista SP2 runs quite nicely, as least on my boxes.
>> A lot of "damage" was done by MS hating lying linturd asshole losers who
>> smelled blood and did everything they could pile on, while they could.
>> 7 simply shut the door on them.
>>
>>
>
> Microsofts 10 worst products.
>
> Despite enjoying huge success with Windows 7 and the Xbox 360, there are
> several other products that Microsoft would probably rather forget about...
>
> Vista
> <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/digital-media/5889239/Microsoft-counting-on-Windows-7-to-cancel-out-Vista-flop.html>
>
>
> Windows Me
> Windows Mobile
> Zune
> Microsoft Ultra Mobile PC
> PlaysForSure
> Microsoft Mira
> Internet Explorer 6
> Microsoft Office Assistant
> Microsoft Bob

Seeing as how there are still millions of happy Vista users, myself
being one of those, I don't care what one reporter of an English rage
thinks about Vista. And his opinion like yours, is not empirical
data...its an opinion, which are like assholes...everyone's got one.
 
C

Cameo

Flightless Bird
<Jeff@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> You do not need to upgrade to run 16 bit XP programs. Just download
> Virtual box and install XP in it. Works very well in my W7 premium
> (not Pro) 64 bit.

Wait a minute ... The Windows7 specs say that you have to have the
Professional version to be able to run XP programs. What virtual box are
you talking about for Home Premium?
 
C

Cameo

Flightless Bird
"Frank" <fb@tbb.moz> wrote in message news:4c23abe5@news.x-privat.org...
> On 6/24/2010 11:23 AM, Cameo wrote:

>> Well, as to Vista being a big leap forward is debatable.
>
> No, it is a know fact.
>
> XP is still
>> more popular than Vista.
>
> And XP has been out much, much longer than XP.
>
> But that's just my opinion ...
>
> But your opinion is not factual.

What makes yours factual? I still have Vista in one partition and it
takes forever to boot it up und shut it down. Nothing like Windows7,
which I like.
Win7 may be based on Vista code but that would probably just mean
that MS kept only the good stuff from Vista and recoded all the rest.
Oh, and before you start it ... I am not a Microsoft hater. Far from
it!
 
B

Big 666

Flightless Bird
Cameo wrote:
> <Jeff@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> You do not need to upgrade to run 16 bit XP programs. Just download
>> Virtual box and install XP in it. Works very well in my W7 premium
>> (not Pro) 64 bit.
>
> Wait a minute ... The Windows7 specs say that you have to have the
> Professional version to be able to run XP programs. What virtual box are
> you talking about for Home Premium?



<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMware_Workstation>

<http://www.vmware.com/support/ws7/doc/releasenotes_ws7.html>

MS has its own virtual machine software too, which is still free I
guess. But I don't think it can match VMware.

<http://www.mydigitallife.info/2009/04/30/virtual-pc-for-windows-7-for-virtual-machine-or-xp-mode-free-download-kb958559/>
 
G

Gordon

Flightless Bird
"Big 666" <6666@6666.com> wrote in message
news:xb6dnUoP8rRm7LnRnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMware_Workstation>
>

VMWare workstation can't create virtual disks (unless they've changed it) -
it can only OPEN pre-created disks.
The OP needs VMWare SERVER. (Also free)
 
J

Jeff@nospam.invalid

Flightless Bird
On 6/25/2010 4:49 AM, Cameo wrote:
> <Jeff@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> You do not need to upgrade to run 16 bit XP programs. Just download
>> Virtual box and install XP in it. Works very well in my W7 premium
>> (not Pro) 64 bit.
>
> Wait a minute ... The Windows7 specs say that you have to have the
> Professional version to be able to run XP programs. What virtual box are
> you talking about for Home Premium?

It is free and does not need W7 Pro:
http://www.virtualbox.org/

Works perfectly and easily. I have virtual disks set up for XP, Ubuntu
and Linuxmint.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top