Virtual Machine Vs. Dual booting

I have the option to get Virtual PC 2007 for free, and I was wondering what its advantages are over just dual booting XP/Vista, and how it works any differently. I have searched through threads about dual-booting plenty, but I guess I just can't read between the lines and find the advantage to having Virtual PC with two OS'es.

Any links to repeat threads appreciated if this is a repeat.

 

Maybe you can get into why you're looking to go between XP and Vista? Unless there's a major compatibility issues you're experiencing I think it's a waste.

Dual booting will take advantage of all of your hardware. If you need all the resources, I'd recommend that. If you don't, I would look into VirtualBox, which is a great free application from Sun. But, if you decide to use Virtual PC that would be fine too.

Running a virtual machine is great because you can run 2 os's at once, instead of having to reboot into the other os. So for example, when I was on Mac OS X, I would run a Windows XP virtual machine daily. This setup allowed me to do my development work with Microsoft tools and still use OS X for my normal activity like Safari and Mac Mail.

 

I don't have Vista yet, I'm just doing research at this point. I have XP Pro 32 bit installed now. I have 4 GB of RAM installed, however, and I just got XP Pro 64 bit to utilize all 4 GB of it. I want Vista for its DirectX 10 capability. I don't like Vista's setup at all, so I would only use its DirectX 10/64 bit environment for gaming, where RAM and drivers are fully utilized. I would use 64 bit XP Pro for older generation games (games I play now, like CS/DOD) and to use the full 4 GB. I would use my current state (32 bit XP Pro) for everyday menial tasks/web surfing. Ideally, I'd like to triple-boot.

I understand driver support for 64 bit XP is poor, but I'd be willing to do the driver-hunting.

 

Ok, sounds like your mind is made up then. Dual booting is for you. If you're gaming, no need to use a virtual machine.