New mini + parallels+ win98 + xp upgrade = disaster!

Discussion in 'Windows, Linux & Others on the Mac' started by nhcowboy1, Sep 14, 2008.

  1. nhcowboy1 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #1
    Before I set up my new mini, I carefully did a lot of research on what the easiest method might be to get the Windows XP capability that I need. I finally realized that the easiest thing to do was just try a trial of parallels . . if I like it, I'll keep it. Otherwise I can switch to Fusion.

    Great, so I download parallels, go to do the XP installation and quickly realize I have a mess on my hands! The software I was given for installing XP is as follows: a Win98 cd, an XP upgrade CD, and (I'm not making this up, I swear!) a thumbdrive with some additional files that I was told I'd need to complete the installation. Okay, in retrospect, maybe just going out and buying XP would have been easier, but I need this for some volunteer teaching I'm doing, and this is what the school gave me. Anyway, the Parallels installer (which was expecting XP) had no clue what to do with the Win98 files I pointed it to . . . and, frankly, neither did I.

    Yes, before you send me there, I have found the user-created online guide to installing Win98 on parallels. Problem is, my final objective is not Win98, but XP - and there's no guide that tells me how to upgrade from the one to the other. I also find it more than a little bit unsettling that the user-created guide differs completely from the info given in the official Parallels user guide . . . . And, of course, neither of them tell me what to do with those extra bits from the thumbdrive!

    So, I'm feeling pretty useless and overwhelmed. About the only thing I can do is tell you what files are on what cds . . . so if anyone is willing to help, and needs that info, please ask!
     
  2. Bill&Rose macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    #2
    You should have put the Windows XP upgrade disk in, when Windows asked all you should of had to do was put the windows 98 disk in long enough for the XP installer to see that you qualified for the upgrade.

    I don't think you have to install Windows 98 first then do the upgrade.

    I have never installed using parallels so maybe it requires something different, but I would think it would have worked the way I said.
     
  3. nhcowboy1 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #3
    Wow - that almost worked!

    It did, in fact, recognize the XP disk and went through part of the installation process. Then, as you predicted, it asked for the Win98 disk. Took me a minute to figure out how to eject and load disks in the virtual machine, but got the Win 98 disk in and . . . nothing. It said it didn't recognize the disk as an authentic Windows disk. :(

    So, either I'm still doing something wrong, or there's something wrong with the disk I was given. I swear I don't get it - both disks are copies, but the XP one worked and the Win98 one didn't!

    So, I can go back to the person who gave me the disks, but - in the meantime - am I missing something?
     
  4. Riverside macrumors member

    Riverside

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2008
    Location:
    Don't let the Macrumors level fool you.
    #4
    Umm...

    I don't mean to be presumptuous here, but if you're using copied CD's "given" to you by someone, that could easily be construed as piracy, which is strongly frowned on here. Not to mention, it's going to give you problems later with updates when you try to validate Windows.

    That being said, I think you're flat out asking for trouble anyway trying to install the way you are.

    My advice is go out and get a legit straight-up XP CD off the shelf. Yeah, it'll be more expensive, but as far as I'm concerned, my time is worth more than the kind of trouble you're talking about.

    Just do it the recommended way, and you'll have a lot less headaches and stress.

    Of course, you could just be stubborn (as I often am), and simply refuse to accept that it won't work (not that I'm saying it won't, just that it's probably not worth the trouble). I've found that in almost every case I've been told something isn't possible, if I'm stubborn enough, I can figure out haw to make it work.

    Then again, I often find it would have been much simpler to do things another way, even if it means spending a couple of bills to get it done.

    You DO qualify for academic discounts, right?
     
  5. nhcowboy1 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #5
    Well, "almost" seems to be the key word here.

    Bill&Rose was (were?) correct that the XP update had to be loaded first, followed by Win98. And when I finally used an original retail disk of Win 98, it installed with no problem.

    Running Windows on my mini was another story altogether. Yes, I got Windows, which I needed . . . but at what price? Trying to use the mini with Windows running in the background was just painful. It worked - but all I could think was that it made my brand new mini seem like it was already outdated. Performance was . . . well . . . "awful" doesn't even come close to describing it.

    So, it was an interesting experiment, but it's over. I borrowed a desktop pc from the school, and set that up next to the mini. Cleared off the desk (which needed to happen sooner or later anyway) and set up a second monitor. Windows now runs just fine - where it belongs, on the pc. And I've got my mini back.

    I spent the entire day clicking on the wrong mouse for the wrong computer, then the wrong keyboard for the wrong computer, then the wrong mouse again . . . wash, rinse, repeat. But except for human error, it all . . . finally . . . works.
     
  6. brand macrumors 601

    brand

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #6
    Sounds like you need a KVM.
     
  7. nhcowboy1 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #7
    That's the plan. Although I may give remote desktop a try first . . .

    But at the moment, I am just basking in the glory of finally having gotten it all to work . . . . and being able to look at both monitors at once is kind of the icing on the cake. :)
     
  8. SnowLeopard2008 macrumors 604

    SnowLeopard2008

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    #8
    Why didn't you just use Boot Camp? Virtualization requires at the very least 2GB of ram. 1GB for the host, and 1Gb for the guest. But it's good to hear you solved the problem!
     

Share This Page