Is there a Virtual Machine that can run Win98/2k? I'm currently using WinXP SP2 and the one I downloaded from MS Website doesn't have 98/2k on its list of bootable OSes. I need it for experimenting purposes. I would really appreciate your replies.

yup

virtualpc
vmware
virtualbox

all of them will work with any os

i recommend virtualbox, it's by far the fastest one

Virtualbox is a great product but from my experience and from all other reports I've read from others trying it, it doesn't really do a great job with 9x systems. It's great for XP, Vista, Linux though.

Work-arounds for the lack of additions support for 9x are there. I used SciTech Display Doctor 7 Beta with a key-gen to make a registration key for it for the video. They offer keys for the older versions on their website but they don't work on 7 Beta and that's the only one of those that work on 98SE from my experience. Hence my hunting around and downloading the keygen. Either the newly included SB16-AWE32 support (and 98SE comes with the driver for that) or the Intel Audio (better, I think, because the Midi works where it can't with SB16 because there isn't a real midi FM chip emulated by Virtualbox) with Realtek's Windows 95 VXD driver (extract with WinRAR and point Device Manager to it because the Realtek setup won't install if it's not Windows 95). Use Rain20 to give the CPUHLT instruction so you're processor won't run at 100% all the time.

It'll work then, but really slow especially for web browsing and Office stuff.

VMWare runs 9x terrific. Workstation is best, but Server or Player can be used (free) if Workstation is too pricey. VMWare Tools are there for 9x as well so Video, Shared Folders, etc, all work fine.

WARNING

running 98 on Virtual Machines can cause overheating.

you *will* need CPUIdle or something similar for the emulated 98 box... otherwise you almost definately will run into heating a priority issues (the emulated 98 box does NOT have an idler... and the emu uses the idle ticks to prioritize the emu to the real machine)

While it *will* run.... if you notice incorrect timers on the emu, you **need** CPUIdle software for the emulated machine....

I burned up a p4 2.8Ghz that way a few months back... had DOS in a VM, and was running a 'burn-in' proggie... left in on overnight, and in the morning it was dead. power ok, just dead. then I read about the idling problems when using a DOS based OS in a VM (all 9x are DOS-based for this comparison).

And if I am somehow wrong... hey, I'm just trying to help out. I *know* my burnt CPU was from this... you can have your own opinion.... actually, if you think I am wrong... let's talk. I never had this happen before... and it has scared me off of playing around with 98SE on my main machines...

DeadDude, You're right! 16 bit Apps use 100% CPU all the time, just start Task Manager and you'll see. Not only on a VM enviroment. They've direct access to the BIOS (hardware).

Your P4 died because you didn't take good enough care of it...

You ever heard of Folding@Home? This distributed computing program keeps peoples' CPU busy with calculations that are sent to a server and help in cancer research. People have been running this for YEARS and their boxes run just fine. On my main rig, my 98 VM takes up 50% CPU (one core) when it's running, and still takes 50% CPU when minimized, however it runs with lower priority when minimized so it doesn't slow my system down. And guess what, my highly overclocked C2D is still alive and kicking even with ambient temps over 30C.

100% usage does not kill your CPU, heat does.

I'd have to agree with that. The real issue is that a virtual machine is going to put an extra load on your machine anyway and if your cooling solution is not doing it's job properly then that could push it over the edge.

Getting back to the OP's original question, Most, if not all, virtual machine products should run 9x based OSes without any problems even if it's not listed as a supported option. I would suggest downloading the trial and/or free versions of VMware, VirtualBox, etc. and see which one you like best.

Qemu is also a valid option:
http://bellard.org/qemu/
(and allows to be launched via batch)

When used with QemuManager is as user friendly as any other VM:
http://www.davereyn.co.uk/

jaclaz

Did you try? A good VM doesn't care which client OS it runs. The fact MS doesn't support it doesn't say it won't work.

When installing W2000 in Qemu you may need to use the -win2k-hack commandline option. There is a timing bug in the W2000 installer which make the installer stall. When you have a bootable W2000 installation, you can remove the switch. It's slows down virtual HD access.

well, I enjoy the quick talk about my p4 burning up... so I'll try to make this short...

*I'm not saying 100% CPU usage killed a CPU*

The clock in the virtual machine as well as the actual 'real' clock both started loosing time. I didn't really care, I had read somewhere that could happen and is normal (but, that I should use CPUIdle or similar).

*I'm saying an improper virtual machine on improper hardware can cause hardware timing issues that can and will break CPU and/or Motherboard*

I'll see if I can dig up a link... I specifically said 'let's talk about it' because I want to know for a fact what the masses have to say... since it seems pretty clear cut that my cpu burned up during the burn-in... but the CPU had no heating issues before-hand. (mind you, it didn't stay cool in the first place ~65C after all my programs are loaded and running; peaked at ~72C full load).

briefly- is it safe to assume 74C is the max temp any cpu should reach (in a tower)? Intel book says 84C is the absolute breakdown temp (cpu forced shut off), so I assumed my temps were fine.... I had another machine just die, it satyed consistently 68C-72C (74-76C a few times briefly).

not trying to stray too far offtopic....

I haven't used QEMU in about a year... did they speed it up a bit? the older version was too slow to really 'run'....

Weird, I'm using MS Virtual PC on XP and 98 + 2k are officilaly (and totally) supported.

That was your CMOS battery (the battery on the motherboard) dying. It needed a replacement.



The P4s start throttling (slowing down) at 64C. 74C is way too high for any CPUs except overclocked quad cores. On the rig in sig i get 63C full load with 30C ambient, in winter (i keep my house around 20C in the winter) it stays around 55C full load. When doing regular work it sits around 45. Could be even better but i didn't bother to lap the chip.

Mom's P4 2.4 overclocked to 3.6 sits at 50C when doing office work and 63C full load at 30C ambient, under a Scythe Kamakaze, which isn't exactly the best heatsink ever made. Even at that it still throttles every now and then... Download ThrottleWatch and see for yourself. But when ambient temps get cooler it performs very well and sits around 58C.

Keeping it short: A P4 or Pentium D shouldn't run anywhere over 65C. Stock PIIIs take 90C no problem, overclocked and overvolted PIIIs become unstable over 55, same for overclocked socket A chips except the >2000+ Athlons, which are safe up to 70C. For C2D (dual-core) 65C max, for C2Q (quad-core) 72C max.

This is coming from someone who overclocks and mods anything he can, i even got a 200MHz Pentium-MMX running rock solid at 292MHz.



Two months ago it was still slow as crap. PS. 98SE runs under the latest Virtual PC fine indeed.

I must admit I've never even heard of such a thing, never mind actually encountered it. Running a VM does put an additional load on the host machine but providing it's properly cooled that shouldn't cause any problems.

Thanks for the heating tips!

as far as the clock losing time and whatnot-

the clock didn't just lose time... it gained time, too... while watching it... and the little I had read online about 'idling within a VM" led me to that conclusion...

Let me ask ya, you can't see how this could ever cause hardware problems of any sort? Before it happened to me, I used multiple VMs on one machine... got multiple Linux VMs, Mac VMs, DOS VMs, and then I also run multiple emulators within each VM.... 2gigs ram can hold a whole bunch of 64meg VMs...

(seriously, no one can see this happening?? I *really* don't think heat alone is what killed it- I took it for granted the timers got all screwy)

Methinks it was a dodgy motherboard...

awesome.

er... well, awesome to have such a large consensus on that particular bandwagon...


I had since stopped using my beloved VMs for everything... but since y'all are so sure (and I just figured it was 'open-and-shut'), I believe ya. I won't be fearful of 'over doing it' with the VMs...

I just bought a temp sensor with lcd panel... it is in F, not C... oh well, at least it takes accurate readings... (found out most MoBo sensors have an unknown temp offset)

(I'm one of those weirdos that likes to run something in something else... over and over again... Vm in VM in VM in VM running an Amiga 500 emu that is running another emu... thought maybe that was *bad*, but you say hardware issue... better news)

The clock issue is a red herring. If you've ever hung out in or searched the VMware forums you would see there is usually a fairly steady trickle of questions about guest, and sometimes host, clocks losing and/or gaining time.

The number of VMs you were running is also a bit of a red herring. If you had 'overloaded' the machine you would have see two effects, an apparent slowdown, ie. host and VMs would have appeared less responsive, and the hardware would have run a bit hotter.

I honestly don't know of anything which can damage a CPU other than the Terrible Twins - Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) and Heat.

Maybe I've missed something here, but why don't you make your own bootable virtual 98 system. I have VirtualPC 5.1 on one of my SE test systems. A standard 98FE install CD ran on it just fine and installed a normal virtual OS. It saved normally. I can load it whenever I want, install apps on it for testing, etc. Haven't tried installing a virtual 2K system yet, but don't see any reason it wouldn't work.

Regarding the clock losing time, I didn't see that using VirtualPC, even on my slow hardware. It did happen on rare occasions when I was downloading multiple files with a download manager and had an AV scanning files "on access", holding the processor at 100%. The mouse movement was very choppy. Nothing would work properly until I either stopped the downloads or disabled the resident AV. The clock went back to the correct time when I rebooted.
Rick

thanks for the help and tips!!

::gonna get back to uber-vm usage now::

Running VirtualPC with a 98 guest system shouldn't cause overheating or 100% processor usage, unless you've got something else that's conflicting. At this moment, I'm posting with IE6 on a virtual 98FE box, running on a 98SE host. Nothing is getting hot. Processor usage is averaging 40 to 45%. With a 366mhz Celeron in the host OS, the guest system is quite slow, but both are working normally.
Rick

So, uh, seeing that running VMs increases CPU Heat and all, is it safe to run it on a 8 year old P4 2.0 GHz Processor with only 512 DDR2 RAM? And regarding this CPUIdle thing, on their website, it says "You can try CpuIdle for 30 days. If you come to the conclusion that you want to use either program after that time you must register". If I can't pay their 30$ fee, would I still be able to use it after 30 days? If not, should I stop using a VM? And which VM really is the best for running Win98SE and Win2k? (no need for ME/NT/other versions)

Additional questions: Where SHOULD I install CPUIdle? My main OS or the VM OS? And how do I transfer files from the PC to the VM?

Let us clear this thing:
A PROPERLY WORKING PC, PROPERLY COOLED, NOT BLATANTLY OVERCLOCKED, CAN WORK AT 100% CPU LOAD FOR EXTREMELY LONG PERIODS OF TIME WITHOUT ANY DAMAGE TO THE MOTHERBOARD, CPU OR ANYTHING.

But of course, Murphy's Law is ALWAYS lurking around trying to prove itself true once again.

You should check and double check that fans are working properly, that the CPU is well seated as well as it's cooler, that there is a good heat transmission between the CPU and the cooler (apply/replace thermal paste if needed).

But the above you should do ANYWAY.

jaclaz

With 98SE, I'm pretty much limited to using VirtualPC 5.1 so I can't help with the "which is best" questions. VirtualPC will run 98 and 2K guest systems with no problems. It also has the ability to let you transfer files between the real and virtual systems.

Somehow I managed to delete my image of the 98SE testbox that had VirtualPC installed, so I made a new one last night, along with a 2K guest system. Neither is completely finished at the moment, lots of updating to do, but they're working well. My system is older and has much lower specs than yours, 366mhz, 160MB RAM. There are no problems with excess heat, memory, or processor usage from using Virtual PC, or any other app I've tried.
A Screenshot of Win2K running in VirtualPC on 98SE. The screenshot was taken on the 98host, then transferred and uploaded with the 2K guest. Both Process Explorer and MemUse are running on the host system to show that it is not being overworked. An app like CPUIdle shouldn't be necessary.
Rick

The VM OS, only effective if it's 9x. But just use Rain, it's free. http://www.benchtest.com/downloads/index.html

@ herbalist: A 366MHz Celeron runs at room temperature no matter what you do to it...

I can live with that. Natural abuse resistance.
It probably helps not having the outer case on as well. Wide open air flow. I swap hard drives so often that the case just gets in the way. The last time I never put it back on.
Rick

I tried installing Win98SE on MS's VirtualPC 2007. For some reason, the bootdisk for Win98SE from www.bootdisk.com doesn't seem to work with it, with the VM saying its file size is wrong. What should I do?

The Windows 98 CD should be bootable by itself. It shouldn't need a floppy.

The OEM 98 cd was a boot cd but the retail versions were not. They need a Window 98 Startup floppy or the same I suppose on a cd image of one.

Oh well, mine was... And as far as i remember my dad bought it separately, it didn't come with the computer (it wasn't an OEM computer anyway), so i suppose it was retail... But i might as well be wrong, it's been a while since i've seen that disc, i only used my backup copy in the last few years.

To my experience, running DOS in any VM software causes 100% processor usage, but not necessarily Windows 98 (not on Virtual PC anyway).
Also, on MS-DOS, I find that using POWER.EXE in config.sys to be more effective than CPUIdle (for the best results, you can use both at the same time ), because CPUIdle only kicks in while on command prompt, but your processor will go back up to 100% as soon as you execute anything. POWER.EXE, on the other hand, is more generic.

Wrong. CPUIdle and similar cooling programs work with all the idle CPU time. Unless you're running an application that takes 100% CPU it'll provide improvement.

Did you feed the downloaded file from bootdisk.com directly to the VM? AFAIK all, or most images from bootdisk.com are executables which create a (physical) floppy for you.

My bad, I meant idle.com, that comes with VPC Additions for DOS in VPC2004. I was talking about DOS, I know that the Windows-based software works fine .

DOSBox, or check out my bootdisk.

Actually in order for the DOS virtual machine to execute a HLT instruction in most idling circumstances, one needs to load *both* :

- dosidle
- sleepvm (or equivalent; like the DOS TSR which comes with the VMadditions for MS VPC)

Load (load high if using an UMB mem manager) these, inside of he VM of course. Tech note : Dosidle is excellent, however its author forgot to hook "int 28h" This is why the system will not idle as expected at the prompt inside of some programs, as someone noted. SleepVM will take care of this, or you could add the sleepvm feature to dosidle easily enough since dosidle is provided with source ASM...

These will suffice to "tame" the VM even when it is running Windows 3.1/3.11fWG. However there exists a VxD which can be loaded in addition (in system.ini) and will do the HALT at idle trick in a Windows way.


HTH


--
Ninho

Oh, now i get that he was talking about CPU idle time in DOS. I didn't even know that kind of thing existed.

I've only recently gotten into using a VM (previously I used a real 98 box, but I upgraded to a Vista machine...well, the hardware was an upgrade, Vista was a downgrade), and Virtual PC 2007 hasn't failed me so far. I've used a couple different versions of Windows XP and Windows 98 SE without any trouble.

So that's my recommendation for XP/Vista users: Microsoft Virtual PC 2007. 98SE doesn't overheat anything for me, and only uses a tiny fraction of the CPU and RAM.