how to ? create/use Xp-sp3 virtual machine

[halsboss]

I have some s/w I don't yet trust and I really really want to be safe.

I thought of creating and using an XP virtual machine inside of my existing xp-sp3, however I am unsure how to create and use a Microsoft VirtualPC image of my existing setup, and I gather that the VMware s/w to create an image isn't freely available (it used to be)... suggestions and links welcomed. No generic "use linux"'s thanks unless you have specific instructions on how to install/run XP-sp3 s/w.

[jagabo]

You create a blank drive in the VM, mount the CD/DVD drive in the VM, then boot the XP disc when the VM starts. Sun's VirtualBox and Microsoft's VirtualPC are free. I think VMWare has a free edition too.

http://www.virtualbox.org/
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/

They walk you through the process when you create a new virtual machine.

[rallynavvie]

Actually VMware Converter is free and so is VMware Player. Use Converter to capture your current machine into a virtual one and then use Player to operate it. There are some limitations as to settings and things that Player can manipulate but it should still work well enough. If needed you could use VMware Server, which is freeware, to manipulate more settings. You can even use Server to operate your VMs but Player tends to be easier to use for most.

[halsboss]

Thanks just downloaded the VMware stuff and will give it a whirl on the weekend. jagabo, I was hoping to clone my existing install rather than install freshly from my win DVD as that may require another key.

[rallynavvie]

If you do need to tweak the VM you've created with Converter you can download Workstation and sign up for the 30-day trial period. I recommend doing that to make sure everything is set up the way you like it. You should try out Unity mode if you do. If you set up Unity in Workstation it will work with the latest version of Player. I use Unity for several of the VMs I run on my workstation.

[halsboss]

Oh well, so much for VMware and XP ... windows activation kills that idea stone dead as you need another license @ circa $200 - for simply wanting to be safe and test things out. I presume the same applies to virtualbox.

Microsoft are greedy donkeys, they should include/allow one VM (based on prevailing physical machine) as a basic part of their terribly insecure o/s range. But noo, off they go down their internally-focussed expensive too-hard route.

[AlanHK]

I have some s/w I don't yet trust and I really really want to be safe.

A simpler way is to use Sandboxie
Shareware, nag screen if you use it free.

[jagabo]

Oh well, so much for VMware and XP ... windows activation kills that idea stone dead as you need another license @ circa $200 - for simply wanting to be safe and test things out.

Doesn't it give you something like a month before requiring activation? That should be long enough to test some software.

I presume the same applies to virtualbox.

For testing software I use a corporate version of XP that doesn't require activation. After a fresh install I make a copy of the virtual disk. Every now and then I revert to that copy to have a fresh install again. Of course, this wouldn't work for you if you are looking for problems interacting with your fully configured system.

[rallynavvie]

Yeah the licensing thing with VMs is tough. I thought Converter would grab your activation with your current OS when it converted it to a VM? Honestly if the hardware you're running it from has the XP sticker on it I would just activate the VM. M$ associates their OS with hardware and you're just running an extra copy on the same piece of hardware. Now if you start moving that VM around to other systems they could probably give you a hard time about it.

I have a TechNet Pro subscription so I get all the Windows licenses I need. I have VMs of Win95, Win2k, XP, Server 2k3, Server 2k8, and a few flavors of Windows 7 on this box.

[jagabo]

if the hardware you're running it from has the XP sticker on it I would just activate the VM. M$ associates their OS with hardware and you're just running an extra copy on the same piece of hardware.

I don't use VMWare but with VirtualBox and VirtualPC Windows isn't running on the same hardware (as Windows sees it). Most devices are virtualized. The VM can't see the disk controller, the hard drive, the graphics card, the NIC, even the CPU. It sees virtualized devices. It sees a completely different computer.

[rallynavvie]

I don't use VMWare but with VirtualBox and VirtualPC Windows isn't running on the same hardware (as Windows sees it). Most devices are virtualized. The VM can't see the disk controller, the hard drive, the graphics card, the NIC, even the CPU. It sees virtualized devices. It sees a completely different computer.

It's the same with VMware. I was referring to hardware as how M$ will see it for licensing. They see the hardware (the box the host OS is installed on) as "owner" of the license key for the copy of Windows installed on it. If you create a VM of that same copy using the same key and on the same "hardware" then you're in a gray area on their licensing. However if you move or access that cloned VM from any other "hardware" then you may have violated the EULA.

Technically you should have SA on that box to run more than one instance of an OS but I believe that is aimed at running multiple keys, not multiple instances of the same license. This is getting more towards enterprise licensing, not so much for a home user. I doubt M$ is going to come knocking for running VMs of the host OS on the local machine only. Of course this is far from any sort of guarantee. But as much as I hate M$ for their virtual licensing model I just don't see them being as much of a bag of dicks as the RIAA and their witch hunt.

[jagabo]

I agree that MS should allow one to run the same windows license on a VM in the same box. I seem to recall that Vista explicitly allows this with Home Premium and higher editions.

<edit>
Looks like I was wrong: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=160
</edit>

[halsboss]

Nice link. The bottom line is that M$ are nearly a big a bag of you-know-what's as the RIAA and the MPAA whom they are in bed with ...

Joe Blow the consumer isn't allowed to do "Jack Shyte" - not because of any technical reason, it's purely anti-consumer marketing/licensing. They couldn't think outside of their tiny lawyer's box, to letting the purchaser also run the paid-for o/s inside a VM in the very machine it's bought to run on in the 1st place. M$ have lost their way, they hate the people they sell to (or a close enough facsimile thereof).

M$ s/w is becoming too bloated and anti-consumer locked-down anyway. Now, if only Ubuntu etc could lose it's techo focus and obscure packaging etc and become more consumer-friendly with real up-to-date easy to follow instructions then it might get somewhere.

[rallynavvie]

Now, if only Ubuntu etc could lose it's techo focus and obscure packaging etc and become more consumer-friendly with real up-to-date easy to follow instructions then it might get somewhere.

It does

I fight with M$ reps almost weekly about their licensing models for VMs. They say they have solutions for any situation but the system I'm developing at work has them entirely stumped. The only solution they could offer would be so ridiculously cost-ineffective that I had to politely ask them to leave immediately. But we're getting even with them by engineering one of our systems as a terminal service (for which we have enough CALs to cover twice over already) instead of running it on its own in an XP desktop. We'll end up eliminating 15k copies of XP from our ELA which will be a tremendous hit to their wallet. Last I heard they were scrambling to try to tailor their VECD licensing to support our needs and remain cost-neutral

[halsboss]

Good luck to you.

Now, I'm off to look into the joys of Ubuntu inside windows xp and something called Wine. All the obscure package stuff makes my head hurt (and who knows, whether the packages are safe). And how the heck to determine what to install, package and codec-wise, to get the equivalent of dvd decoding, mpeg2, mpeg4-asp, mpeg4-avc playback and with what tools ... I suppose I should browse the forums ...

[rallynavvie]

Get familiar with Synaptic Package Manager so you don't have to run command line installs. Most of the stuff people need is in SPM.

[halsboss]

thanks.

[Webster]

This may have some use for you.
http://www.playonlinux.com/en/
http://wddb.wine-doors.org/downloads