Virtual PC 2007 vs. Dual Boot

Which one is the more stable / practical choice ?

I am looking for the easiest solution to use both OS's

Thanks in advance !

 

I guess that probably depends on what software you are going to use with the virtual machine. I installed virtual PC on my T61p just for two programmes, groupwise as e-maild client and a library remote access tool, because I was unable to get them to work under Vista 64 bit. For me, this works perfectly and is a very convenient solution. However, I saw that VPC considerably slows down XP, so I guess I would not be happy, if I had to use it with some more demanding software...

 

Lee,

I have vmware 6.02 with XP as host and a Linux Slackware BT3 security software program as guest at the moment. Works fine but......it doesn't quite feel like a full up o/s or program if you know what I mean. Feels a little hokey.

But, I also have many hours of MBR troubleshooting and avoid grub and lilo with a passion. And, the Vista MBR process is different again.

So, my preferred dual o/s process is called "gopher". It uses the XP MBR to give a choice of either XP or a Linux o/s without jeopardizing MBR and still providing a full up and running smooth set of dual o/s s.

Alacrity

 

I also have this question. with vista 64, I think I can't run cygwin. So virtual PC2007 or Dual Boot?

I didn't use virtual pc2007 before, but for Dual Boot I need to install two same t61p driver for two operation systems. Can pc2007 avoid this?

 

Thanks Alacrity !

Can anyone else advise ?

 

I use VMWARE under Vista on both my laptop and desktop running sequel server, Oracle, and XP. Virtual software will be less of a headache IMO.

 

If you use a VM make sure that virtualization is enabled in the bios, it wasn't for me.

 

I think the best advice you've received is that it depends upon your requirements.

If you have a large compute bound load, I'd dual boot and approach that admittedly has limitations in convenience but it's optimized for performance and resource utilization. If your VM load is light, then a VM is fine. The decision has to be made around your intended use and work load.

 

Great advise ! I think I'll start off with VM. I can always uninstall and refer to Dual Boot. ( I already have a XP partition setup )

Cheers !

 

Looks like vmware is better. Could someone post a link about it? I want to make a try. Thanks1

 

Here you go. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/virtualpc/default.mspx

 

Virtualpc=sluggish performance, try virtual box its free and umm its fairly fast. If you can dual boot, dual boot your pc, it will perform much better.

 

I believe this is what you are actually looking for.

VMWare Server: http://vmware.com/products/server/
VMWare Workstation: http://vmware.com/products/ws/

Server is free with registration, you may request as many keys as you need. Technically you are supposed to use it on servers, but it works fine on a standard PC. I have run it on several PCs (including ThinkPads) with XP with zero problems.

Workstation costs money but comes with a host of awesome features, like drag and drop, shared folders, dynamic screen resizing, USB 2.0, dual monitor support, etc. Workstation is well worth it. You can get a 30 day trial to see if it's for you.

I have tested all sorts of virtualization software; it's part of my job. VMWare is a step (if not several) ahead of the competition. At this point VMWare is the way to go IMO.

 

since my first post in this thread, my vmware 6.02 workstation is really running well. very smooth on xp host. and, as the last poster mentioned, the features including resizing of the guest is very nice.

and no messing around with dual boot and risking mbr.

have fun.