

XP Mode in Windows 7 is a scam - ableal
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/975/1051975/xp-mode-windows-scam

======
wvenable
The author seems to miss the point. This isn't like Apple emulating classic in
OS X (or even PowerPC on Intel). This is Microsoft emulating one operating
system from within another operating system where the compatibility between
them is extremely high. You can take most well written XP applications and run
them on Vista without a hitch and the situation will likely be better with
Windows 7.

So, if the operating systems are so compatible what's the point of XP mode?
There's a huge body of badly written software designed for and test only on XP
that are necessary for businesses. These businesses haven't just been hesitant
to upgrade to Vista, they aren't even considering it. If it doesn't run their
app, there's no point. XP Mode is a way to coax them into upgrading by giving
them an option to run their old crappy software on this new OS. That is all.

You're not supposed to be using XP mode to run games, so it's lack of GPU
support doesn't matter. You're not supposed to be using it to interact with
all sorts of devices. That's what the host operating system, Windows 7, is
for. If you're going to virtualize everything in XP, you might as well just be
running XP.

~~~
potatolicious
No matter which platform you're on, there's always this tug of war between
back-compat and pushing the state of the art forward. With VM/emulation-based
solutions we can now have our cake and eat it too.

Why virtualize XP? Simple: version 1 of crappy XP app may only run on XP, but
version 2 may run on Windows 7. By pushing apps that refuse to update
themselves into a corner, the hope is that app developers will be more
motivated to keep their crap up to date, and remove the horrible "meh, we'll
call on Win95 APIs" laziness. All this can now be done without harming the
consumer (who still gets to run his apps).

IMHO virtual XP is one of the more brilliant moves on MS's part in a long
time. Their OS has been stagnant for a long time owing a large part to the
obsession with backwards compatibility. Thankfully that may now be behind us.

------
tophat02
This is one of the crappiest articles I've ever read. This tripe doesn't
belong on HN!

The author assumes that most people will want to use XPM to run 3d-intensive
applications and games, and require access to all their peripherals.
Ludicrous.

The author also assures us that there will ZERO 3d support on the VM. Maybe
not, but if he were at all familiar with Parallels and VMWare Fusion, he would
know that this has been done and Microsoft could do it as well.

He accuses Microsoft of "FUD" while simultaneously refusing to call Vista by
its proper name, instead calling it "Broken OS". Hypocrite!

He assumes that everyone else "thinks" that XPM will be some magical
transparent layer over 7 that most users won't know about and will magically
run all their old applications. He also implicitly accuses Microsoft of
misrepresenting XPM in this way. Bullshit! Microsoft has done no such thing.
They make clear that this is just a Virtual PC with some Coherence/Unity like
functionality, not some magical pixie dust integrated into 7.

Lastly, he completely ignores the potential long term ramifications of this.
This is just V1; Microsoft WILL eventually move to a Hyper-V based system in
which all previous version of the Windows OS will be transparently virtualized
and, if possible, share the hardware. At some point, it WILL be magic pixie
dust sprinkled in the operating system, in which your old apps continue to
"just work" while Microsoft is finally free to do major housecleaning of the
Windows internals.

So, I rest my case. This article is CRAP!

~~~
ableal
Well, I tossed it in because I was getting a bit sick of the twitter pr0n flu
videos, and thought that a discussion of MS joining the desktop virtualization
party would be interesting.

Of course, even for TheInq, the author stands out for sporting a somewhat
rottweilerish style, which does get a rise out of his readers. Note that he
also got some good flack in his comments.

Apart from the scornful hostile tone, I don't think there's much that's
technically inaccurate - it's just put in the worst possible light, like an
attack lawyer would do. Which isn't really that bad: we can use a bit of
critical thinking about what can _realistically_ be had out of desktop
virtualization, for what markets (and role vs. 'any browser + cloud apps').

------
seekely
I will never ever understand all the hate for Vista. Excusing the annoyance of
UAC, it is their best effort yet. Not without problems. Not without missing
features when compared to your favorite OS. Not an incarnation of a perfect OS
by an ideal company. But certainly a very functional and reliable product.
Maybe my dataset is just too small.

Though, Microsoft just can't do anything right by techies anymore. A
comparison to ME? Really? Such fanatical hate.

~~~
sounddust
Agreed. And even if you do have some valid reason to hate Vista, I think most
people can agree that Windows 7 is a vast improvement. The author of this
article, however, claims that Microsoft is intentionally leaking info to
sympathizers to hide its flaws: " _Microsoft is conducting a very carefully
crafted PR campaign to make Windows 7 seem less broken than the Broken OS_ ".
What BS! Does he not know that the Beta and RC are publicly available to
anyone who wants to download it?

Of course it shouldn't be a surprise that the article is flamebait considering
its source. theinquirer.net should be on the HN auto ban list, in my opinion.
When have they ever reported on anything without trying to incite people in
the process?

~~~
agola
_"Does he not know that the Beta and RC are publicly available to anyone who
wants to download it?"_

That's essentially true, although in the interests of strict accuracy (for
people like me who recently went looking to download it), there aren't any
versions currently available for download: the Beta hasn't been available for
weeks, and the RC won't be posted until May 5th.

<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/default.aspx>

 _"We're sorry, Windows 7 Beta downloads are no longer available. If you've
got a copy of the Beta and need a key, here's where to look...The Windows 7 RC
will be available May 5, and you'll be able to download it from this site
through July."_

------
philwelch
Knowing Microsoft's history, it won't matter how broken XP Mode is. By Windows
8 or 9, it'll work well enough they can dump the old system entirely and move
to something better, like Apple did with Mac OS X. (It will never be perfect,
but the number of users they'll lose due to backwards compatibility may become
small enough to be worth writing off.)

~~~
rbanffy
"they can dump the old system entirely and move to something better"

No... They will move to something newer. It's Microsoft we are talking about.

There is great danger on not making APIs a moving target: competitors like
Wine may catch up provide adequate compatibility with stable enough APIs. With
a moving target, they have to continuously play catch-up.

~~~
philwelch
There's nothing stopping them from using BSD code again, or buying someone
else's OS. Apple did both (they bought NeXT for NeXTStep, but NeXTStep had BSD
code).

~~~
rbanffy
They need to use standards that are different and incompatible with whatever
competitors use. If Microsoft went BSD with, say, Windows 9, it would be easy
to port Unix stuff to Windows, which would be nice for them, but it would also
be easy to port, say, Windows 9 applications to other unixes, which is a big
showstopper for them. They didn't achieve market dominance they enjoy by
making easy for their customers to port away Windows apps. Once you write one,
you are pretty much stuck.

If you can't suffocate, there is little point in embracing and extending.

