Today microsoft listed VPC 2004 as a free download. They also said VPC 2007 will also be free.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Virtual PC is now Free!
- Thread starter sjjordan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's just another VMware solution for Windows.
In case a developer needed to test something in Windows98 or XPhome or whatever.
In case a developer needed to test something in Windows98 or XPhome or whatever.
yellow is correct. Microsoft did not buy Virtual PC for Virtual PC. Microsoft bought VPC for Connectix's Virtual Server, which was still in beta at the time. Virtual PC came along for the ride.markkk! said:
With Virtual Server, Microsoft hoped to solve a vexing problem. The problem is that the enterprise does not trust Microsoft software, particularly Windows. Enterprise IT lags one or two versions behind M$'s must current offerings in its software rollouts. The Redmond Monopoly hoped to persuade its enterprise customers to rollout its most current software on Virtual Server hosted on trusted older systems. In this way, Microsoft would increase sales of its new software--it hoped.
The strategy failed. Virtual Server is now a free download. With Virtual PC for Windows now free, it is all over but the shouting. There was a question about an Intel port of VPC:mac, but that question is moot. Parallels Workstation already available for Intel-based Macs. An Intel port of VPC, a once proud software title, is unlikely.
Yet another chapter in the long tome of acquisitions by Microsoft of good software that became moribund and fell off the face of the earth.
Connectix, ya were there when we needed ya and were damn good at what ya did. Hope your codefolks got a great buyout package and are now busy doing meaningful things elsewhere, not droning along in some obscure dev lab at Microsoft.
Here's to RAMDoubler, SpeedDoubler, the QuickCam, and VirtualPC. You helped make the Mac superlative.
(I still use VirtualPC 6, the last of the Connectix line. Since my next Mac will undoubtedly have an Intel processor, I'll never own the Microsoft version)
Connectix, ya were there when we needed ya and were damn good at what ya did. Hope your codefolks got a great buyout package and are now busy doing meaningful things elsewhere, not droning along in some obscure dev lab at Microsoft.
Here's to RAMDoubler, SpeedDoubler, the QuickCam, and VirtualPC. You helped make the Mac superlative.
(I still use VirtualPC 6, the last of the Connectix line. Since my next Mac will undoubtedly have an Intel processor, I'll never own the Microsoft version)
As far as I'm concerned, Virtual PC is basically obsolete anyway (I guess it's still the best solution for non-intel macs). Going from VPC to Parallels is a HUGE upgrade. Hardly even comparable.
l3lue said:
I'm not sure why everyone sings the death of VPC so quickly. I was under the impression that Parallels is not 100% compatible with windows applications. I'm guessing that for the more popular apps this is fine but for more obscure apps you may need a full blown copy of Windows installed. You may say just dual boot with Boot Camp but I'd rather not have to do that and would like to keep Safari browsing and be able to check my email in Mail while kicking of Windows apps.
VPC for windows gives application developers an environment to run various versions of Windows from different virtual disks giving the chance to debug multiple OSes using a single computer. For apps that do a lot of memory allocation/handling it is also an extremely nice environment since if the app brings down the OS it does not bring down your main OS, only the VPC.
You have to look at what VPC is to Microsoft. VPC opens the door for selling more copies of Windows. MS does not care what hardware Windows runs on, just that the copy that is being run is a legally purchased copy. Whether it's run on VPC for Windows or Mac it still requires another copy of Windows to be sold.
With the advent of dual-boot (Bootcamp), Parallels, and the other offerings out there in the pike...
Microsoft would have to start over from scratch. They cannot hope to keep on emulating such old hardware on a MacTel and get away with it. I seriously doubt Microsoft will waste any $ on making VPC functional for a MacTel.
It seems counter intuitive to me.
Microsoft would have to start over from scratch. They cannot hope to keep on emulating such old hardware on a MacTel and get away with it. I seriously doubt Microsoft will waste any $ on making VPC functional for a MacTel.
It seems counter intuitive to me.
ahunter3 said:
The Win version is free-as it did not include a Windows license. The Mac version has editions with a Windows license, and thus that can't be free yet. So move along-nothing to see.
DarkNetworks said:i was all excited when i saw Virtual PC free but then i realize it's for Windows...
Same here....
SWEET! I for one have been wanting to install Final Fantasy VII for the longest time (it doesn't work in XP). Now I can bust out my old copy of Win98 and get it to working! Hoorah!
I'm not sure MS will completely drop VPC for the Mac either, just because it provides them an easy way to sell it with bundled Windows licenses, which (even if the app sucks) is cheaper than Parallels with a full, retail OS install. If nothing else, they'll probably see it as a way to reduce piracy and sell some XP/Vista, instead of having people run Parallels with their old copy of W2K or whatever.
I was just wondering something, though: Since VPC is free for Win now, if you have the OSes laying around, could you run it under Parallels to have, say, Win98 running from within WinXP, or do the virtualization features built into the chip break down when doing something like that? And yes, I know it would be functionally useless, since you could just have two virtual machines running in Parallels, but I'm just curious.
Could be useful for running an older OS while booted in BootCamp, though.
I was just wondering something, though: Since VPC is free for Win now, if you have the OSes laying around, could you run it under Parallels to have, say, Win98 running from within WinXP, or do the virtualization features built into the chip break down when doing something like that? And yes, I know it would be functionally useless, since you could just have two virtual machines running in Parallels, but I'm just curious.
Could be useful for running an older OS while booted in BootCamp, though.
i got this yesterday and installed vista beta 2 in it. very easy to use, and it does cpu pretty fast, but it emulates a crappy video card that makes vista run incredibly slow. i think im gonna install ubuntu inside it as well...