[waldojim]

Ok, so here goes. For the last few days I have been playing around with my laptop trying (unsuccessfully) to play a couple very old Dos games. First I would like to mention, that I am not a moron, I can typically figure out just about anything and keep moving. That said, this project has just about beaten me into the ground. As I type this, I am using Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 to copy files from one VM hard drive to another - more on that in a minute. Initially, I tried the 99% Open Source - 100% free route. I booted into Ubuntu 10.10, and fired up Oracles Virtual Box. Which started crapping its pants the moment I mentioned EMM386 (needed for a few of my games). No more than I breathed the letters "EMS" and it cried mercy, telling me to quit making it think. In other words, it was a very short lived attempt. I then attempted to install vmware workstation 7 trial, and it refuses to compile drivers... even shorter lived attempt.

Now, I DO have Windows 7 on here, and don't mind using what works. SO, first thing I do - Install VMWare Workstation. VMWare Workstation has some very nifty advantages over everything I have tried - namely RAW hard disk support. So after I install DOS, and a few CDROM drivers, I decide - hey it is time for some games! Oh wait... need a cdrom ISO for that. OR I can use my handy 1GB SD card formatted to Fat 16 as a temporary additional hard drive! KICK BUTT! Cool - games are installed, lets fire one up! Ta-da!!! wait... where is the sound? Oh there is none, as they removed Sound Blaster emulation. Well... not so short lived, but not productive either.

SO I attempt again for Virtual Box, and run into similar problems (turns out Virtual Box has issues with EMS calls, and a few other Real Mode limitations), though add to it that it has ZERO raw hard drive support, forcing me to download magic ISO (15 day trial) to create an ISO for my software...

I then remember that Microsoft created this wonderful thing called Virtual PC. Which is the most unfriendly, asinine, backwards thinking software I have EVER come across. Why is there no option to select boot device? Why is there nothing telling you WHAT the virtual machine is doing while it starts? Why are there so very few configurable options?! AND what is with the half complete Windows integration? I like how this software SORT OF integrates into Windows - the parts that were done correctly are WONDERFUL! Other parts... not so much. Also, is there a reason that ONLY VMWware knows how to provide raw disk support?

Any how, interesting thing this Virtual PC... I installed it, and the "XP mode" as well, and actually LOVE how XP runs in the VM. It takes XP about 2~3 minutes to boot on my Single core 1.6Ghz chip, but it runs in 256MB of ram quite nicely, and resumes from hibernate in a few seconds. Once it is running, it is darned near invisible as well (my machine is currently running FireFox, XP VM, and DOS VM, and still using less than 1/2 of my 2GB of ram!) It has access to all my current files (through network access!), and allows me to access my Dos virtual disk. This is why I am using XP to copy files from my Host OS to a different guest OS. Why NONE of these will give you direct access to the guest file system is beyond me... It cannot be that hard.

So here I am, with 3 different Virtual Machines on my poor laptop, wondering how it is that ONLY MS could provide something that actually works.

I have not tried Qemu, Dosbox, or similar emulators yet, as I was trying to avoid full blown emulators as I don't have an extremely powerful laptop at my disposal here, just my little single core laptop...

SO - after all that, I want to know a few things. First off, have any of you tried running your old games via virtual machine? What was your success rate? What did you use for software/hardware? Any other related experiences you would like to share? I really want to know what to know what does and does not work. Hopefully this helps others as well. Knowing what people HAVE tried can sometimes lead others down the right path... and there is no sense repeating the same test hoping for different results.

This post has been edited by coastie65: 18 January 2011 - 09:53 AM

[waldojim]

For what it is worth, the Virtual PC is a bust as well... even the simplest tasks slow it down to a slide show... shoot even the actual slideshows weren't displayed correctly. Not sure where to go from here.

[Car54]

waldojim, loved your last questions on both poll topics

To start with, I think this was a very good topic to thread..along the lines of compnovo's, Benchmarking Our Rigs, good one

Sorry I couldn't complete the Poll, but the free version of VMWare (Player) wasn't listed, so my poll answers aren't listed.

I didn't realize how few resources that Window XP Mode needed to run, until I answered a thread (which I probably shouldn't have, as I only have VMWare experience) as crazy4laptops, and Rommel correctly pointed that out and like you realized here too. I mainly use it for testing security software and betas, so as far as games, cannot give you any feedback there. I have found for my lightweight purposes that VMWare is better than Virtual Box, those are the only two I have tried. I couldn't get Virtual Box to open up in full screen mode like I can with VMWare, maybe I just didn't know where to click and tick?

This post has been edited by Car54: 06 January 2011 - 07:27 AM

[SnyperTodd]

Maybe I'm wrong, but wouldn't a virtual machine take more resources than a DOS emulator? I honestly don't know- I haven't played around with virtual machines very much at all. Either way, I've used DOSBox for years to keep my old DOS games going. I just fired it up and ran a little Police Quest 1 in there, it used just under 35MB of RAM and CPU usage hovered around 1-2%. I don't know, that's what I use and it's worked fine on every machine I've tried it on.

[waldojim]

Car54, on 06 January 2011 - 06:44 AM, said:

waldojim, loved your last questions on both poll topics

To start with, I think this was a very good topic to thread..along the lines of compnovo's, Benchmarking Our Rigs, good one

Sorry I couldn't complete the Poll, but the free version of VMWare (Player) wasn't listed, so my poll answers aren't listed.

I didn't realize how few resources that Window XP Mode needed to run, until I answered a thread (which I probably shouldn't have, as I only have VMWare experience) as crazy4laptops, and Rommel correctly pointed that out and like you realized here too. I mainly use it for testing security software and betas, so as far as games, cannot give you any feedback there. I have found for my lightweight purposes that VMWare is better than Virtual Box, those are the only two I have tried. I couldn't get Virtual Box to open up in full screen mode like I can with VMWare, maybe I just didn't know where to click and tick?

I thought about adding VMWare player to the list, but figured it kind of fell in there with VMWare Server - both of free, limited use products - and limited in different ways. VMWare server allows for no hardware acceleration - but lets you create new guest machines, while VMWare Player needs the guest machines to already exist, while allowing for hardware acceleration.

Virtual Box WILL run full screen, but it seems to be a bigger pain in the butt.

[waldojim]

SnyperTodd, on 06 January 2011 - 08:40 AM, said:

Maybe I'm wrong, but wouldn't a virtual machine take more resources than a DOS emulator? I honestly don't know- I haven't played around with virtual machines very much at all. Either way, I've used DOSBox for years to keep my old DOS games going. I just fired it up and ran a little Police Quest 1 in there, it used just under 35MB of RAM and CPU usage hovered around 1-2%. I don't know, that's what I use and it's worked fine on every machine I've tried it on.

I was hoping to be able to use a slightly older graphics environment to work in as well, and most of the emulators don't support it. I don't particularly enjoy poking around dos commands all day, and figured I would try to set up Geoworks or the like to make my life easier. So far, I cannot even get the games to run smoothly on their own... so no need for the GUI - but it left me wondering how complete the emulators really are. I will try a couple of them later today.

Last night I did try Qemu, and while it runs MUCH better than the others, it was still too slow to be useful.

[SnyperTodd]

Don't you remember the days when you'd boot up a machine and all you'd see was a DOS prompt?

That's basically what you get with DOSBox. Once you mount the drive(s) you want to use, it's not that bad. I don't do anything hardcore with it though, just play some old DOS games once in a blue moon...

[waldojim]

SnyperTodd, on 08 January 2011 - 07:57 PM, said:

Don't you remember the days when you'd boot up a machine and all you'd see was a DOS prompt?

That's basically what you get with DOSBox. Once you mount the drive(s) you want to use, it's not that bad. I don't do anything hardcore with it though, just play some old DOS games once in a blue moon...

I really do miss those days... I wouldn't mind being able to add that to my multi-boot... just reboot, select DOS, and have fun!

[LiveBrianD]

Wait - 1.6GHz CPU? You mean your Thinkpad x100e ultraportable? I didn't think something like that would do virtualization well!

Also, I find VirtualBox only works well with OSes like NT4, W2K, XP, Vista and 7 - not 9x (I've tried), and likely not DOS.

[waldojim]

LiveBrianD, on 09 January 2011 - 12:08 PM, said:

Wait - 1.6GHz CPU? You mean your Thinkpad x100e ultraportable? I didn't think something like that would do virtualization well!

Also, I find VirtualBox only works well with OSes like NT4, W2K, XP, Vista and 7 - not 9x (I've tried), and likely not DOS.

Yes I do mean the 1.6Ghz ultra portable! I know it sounds crazy, but I just want to be able to play my old dos games on it. I just found out last night though, that this may be a moot point. I keep forgetting that I am missing a crucial part of the keyboard needed for some older games. Namely the number pad!

[LiveBrianD]

waldojim, on 09 January 2011 - 01:41 PM, said:

LiveBrianD, on 09 January 2011 - 12:08 PM, said:

Wait - 1.6GHz CPU? You mean your Thinkpad x100e ultraportable? I didn't think something like that would do virtualization well!

Also, I find VirtualBox only works well with OSes like NT4, W2K, XP, Vista and 7 - not 9x (I've tried), and likely not DOS.

Yes I do mean the 1.6Ghz ultra portable! I know it sounds crazy, but I just want to be able to play my old dos games on it. I just found out last night though, that this may be a moot point. I keep forgetting that I am missing a crucial part of the keyboard needed for some older games. Namely the number pad!

How necessary for games is a keypad anyway? Most ones I've seen need letters and arrow keys.

[waldojim]

LiveBrianD, on 09 January 2011 - 04:28 PM, said:

waldojim, on 09 January 2011 - 01:41 PM, said:

LiveBrianD, on 09 January 2011 - 12:08 PM, said:

Wait - 1.6GHz CPU? You mean your Thinkpad x100e ultraportable? I didn't think something like that would do virtualization well!

Also, I find VirtualBox only works well with OSes like NT4, W2K, XP, Vista and 7 - not 9x (I've tried), and likely not DOS.

Yes I do mean the 1.6Ghz ultra portable! I know it sounds crazy, but I just want to be able to play my old dos games on it. I just found out last night though, that this may be a moot point. I keep forgetting that I am missing a crucial part of the keyboard needed for some older games. Namely the number pad!

How necessary for games is a keypad anyway? Most ones I've seen need letters and arrow keys.

There were a few that didn't have the option to remap the keys. Cyber Empires is one of them.

[Rommel]

waldojim, on 08 January 2011 - 08:26 PM, said:

SnyperTodd, on 08 January 2011 - 07:57 PM, said:

Don't you remember the days when you'd boot up a machine and all you'd see was a DOS prompt?

That's basically what you get with DOSBox. Once you mount the drive(s) you want to use, it's not that bad. I don't do anything hardcore with it though, just play some old DOS games once in a blue moon...

I really do miss those days... I wouldn't mind being able to add that to my multi-boot... just reboot, select DOS, and have fun!

Wow, you guys are crazy, LOL.

I do remember that Snyper, That was the my first pc game time also, wolfinstine, spelled something like that.
Give me icons to click.

Rommel

[SnyperTodd]

Wolfenstein! I remember that game, it was one of the first that I played all the way through. I totally forgot about that game, I'm gonna have to find it again...

[Rommel]

SnyperTodd, on 09 January 2011 - 06:27 PM, said:

Wolfenstein! I remember that game, it was one of the first that I played all the way through. I totally forgot about that game, I'm gonna have to find it again...

It challendged your memory with all the different doors and hallways to take.
And to remeber the one to get you to the next level.

@ Waldojim, did you ever hear of this site. www.virtualbox.org ?
Its new to me but works, so they say, with windows and linux.
The windows download with allow a VM of windows 3.1 to W7.

Rommel

[waldojim]

Rommel, on 09 January 2011 - 06:45 PM, said:

SnyperTodd, on 09 January 2011 - 06:27 PM, said:

Wolfenstein! I remember that game, it was one of the first that I played all the way through. I totally forgot about that game, I'm gonna have to find it again...

It challendged your memory with all the different doors and hallways to take.
And to remeber the one to get you to the next level.

@ Waldojim, did you ever hear of this site. www.virtualbox.org ?
Its new to me but works, so they say, with windows and linux.
The windows download with allow a VM of windows 3.1 to W7.

Rommel

Yes I have heard of virtual box (check the poll )

Wolfenstien is one of MANY games I intent to get running again, Privateer, Righteous fire, Wing Commander, Doom, Quake, Heretic, Hexen, Beyond the Wall of stars (16 bit windows! ), Outpost and a few others are also on that list. That is also the reason I wanted a general purpose emulator that could handle it all.

[Rommel]

waldojim, on 09 January 2011 - 07:17 PM, said:

Yes I have heard of virtual box (check the poll )

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well, I know you tried more things than I know.
A VM would be convienent.

Never heard of multiboot rig with DOS as an option.

If thats not practable, do you have space for a stand alone pc just for that?
I guess the VM would avoidthat and thats your point.
Sorry for the "no" help.

Rommel

[waldojim]

Rommel, on 09 January 2011 - 07:29 PM, said:

waldojim, on 09 January 2011 - 07:17 PM, said:

Yes I have heard of virtual box (check the poll )

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well, I know you tried more things than I know.
A VM would be convienent.

Never heard of multiboot rig with DOS as an option.

If thats not practable, do you have space for a stand alone pc just for that?
I guess the VM would avoidthat and thats your point.
Sorry for the "no" help.

Rommel

Nah, your good.
That is part of the reason for the thread. What are people doing with their VM's.

[waldojim]

ok guys, you are going to like this.

How many of you know of WIRELESS drivers for Dos? I know, prior to today, I never heard of such a thing, but ANYONE with a laptop that supports PCMCIA, or a DESKTOP can have wireless IN DOS. Not emulated dos either. Cisco is a wonderful company, and I thank them for this. I already own 2 Cisco Aironet 350 cards for my laptops over the years. Cisco released actual dos drivers for their aironet line of cards. There were PCI and PCMCIA cards, and I believe both are supported.

For those interested: Here is the how-to.

[techie4fun]

I use VMware Player for Win.XP. It's FREE! Haven't got the money to spend $189 on Workstation quite yet but I'm envy. I've tried VirtualBox in the past but was not happy with the results so I moved to VMW. Player. I currently run VMW to run multiple versions of XP and Windows 2000 mainly for software testing. I would like to install Ubuntu and give Doom 3 a trial to see how well it performs in the virtual machine. I was extremely satisfied by how well the game performed on my hard disk install of Ubuntu, so I don't see why it wouldn't perform as well in a Virtual Machine. We'll see.