Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Reg Edwards programs

J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
amdx said:
It's been a while since a I accessed Reg Edwards wonderful programs.
In fact it was one computer ago!
I now run Win 7 X64, And they don't run on this system.

http://www.zerobeat.net/G4FGQ/page3.html#S301"

Any Ideas how I can make use of Reg's programs?
Mikek

Try a virtual machine. Sun's is pretty good and allows you to operate
with legacy OS'es.

If all else fails return to the last-known-good Windows OS which is XP.
 
L

Les Cargill

Jan 1, 1970
0
Joerg said:
Try a virtual machine. Sun's is pretty good and allows you to operate
with legacy OS'es.

I looked at VMWare and VMLite, and went with VMLite.
 
L

Les Cargill

Jan 1, 1970
0
Joerg said:
Same here.



As far as I have heard from programmers it does not have one that covers
older stuff. Which automatically makes it a no-go for me because I have
late 80's software that I do occasionally need and for which there is no
modern replacement. There is also no chance of further development
because the main authors have either retired or have left planet earth
already, and the source code is unobtanium.

http://www.vmlite.com/ Will expose a Vitual XP machine for you.
 
L

Les Cargill

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jim said:
Is anyone offering new boxes with XP installed?

...Jim Thompson


No. I do not believe they can buy new licenses.
 
T

Tom Del Rosso

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jim said:
I've been avoiding Win7, but I know it's in my future :-(

Does Win7 have "Compatibility Mode"?

Yes but it's a hampered, dumbed-down, version of Virtual PC,which MS owns
only because they bought the company that developed it. Sun's VirtualBox is
much better than the full version of Virtual PC,and is also free. If you
ever need to work on a QNX system in a factory environment for example, you
can become familiar with it on your own PC.

64-bit XP or 64-bit Win7 has an advantage here, because you can have more
than 4GB of RAM, and allocate a few GB to each virtual machine running
simultaneously.
 
R

Rich Webb

Jan 1, 1970
0
I've been avoiding Win7, but I know it's in my future :-(

Does Win7 have "Compatibility Mode"?

Win 7 actually ain't too bad, overall. A little more glitz but basically
it all behaves pretty much like XP.

Win 7 Professional and Ultimate also both have a built-in* Windows
Virtual XP mode. It's even possible to run an app that was installed in
the virtual XP machine on the regular Win 7 desktop and start menu, as
long as the app was installed for all users.

It's not a 100% complete solution for every legacy app. MathCAD 2001i,
for example, won't install because of the way Mathsoft (late, lamented)
implemented their CD-based anti-piracy.

Better if hardware virtualization is supported by the processor, but MS
has a patch to allow non-hardware virtualization.

* If not pre-installed, it can be downloaded from MS.
 
64-bit XP or 64-bit Win7 has an advantage here, because you can have more
than 4GB of RAM, and allocate a few GB to each virtual machine running
simultaneously.

4 GiB of RAM was the limit before Pentium II, but after that, the
internal addressing capability was 36 bits, with potentially 64 GiB of
physical memory addressability. However, some of the earlier
processors did not bring out all of the extra high order address
lines, limiting the available physical memory somewhere between 4 and
64 GiB.

IMHO, the only reason for using processors with 64 bit virtual address
space is large data bases. It is very convenient to map a disk based
multiple terabyte databases (spanning several physical disk drives)
into a single virtual address space and access the bytes on disk by
simply making memory references. The OS page faulting mechanism will
load the referenced pages into memory and also write back to disk, if
RAM is needed for more urgent needs (or by explicit flush requests).

Thus in practice, a few gigabytes of actual RAM will serve as an L3 or
L4 cache, while the real "memory" is spread over several disk
platters.

Of course 64 bit virtual address spaces are not a new thing, I have
used it on DEC Alpha since mid 1990's and I guess there have been
earlier implementations.
 
M

Martin Brown

Jan 1, 1970
0
I've been avoiding Win7, but I know it's in my future :-(

Does Win7 have "Compatibility Mode"?

...Jim Thompson

The Pro-version has a pretty good XP. You can run unsupported virtual
machines on the others. 16bit code will not run native which broke some
major product software installers. And you should probably bite the
bullet and get Win7 soon you are *really* not going to like Win8.

I reckon the new GUI looks like a cubist's bad acid trip. YMMV

It might make sense on a tablet, but on a screen and mouse I reckon the
user will end up throwing the mouse at the screen in sheer frustration.

I reckon all even numbered versions of 'Doze are usually defective.
Win7 has now been around long enough to have shaken down and be stable.
 
J

Joerg

Jan 1, 1970
0
L

Les Cargill

Jan 1, 1970
0
M

Martin Riddle

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jim Thompson said:
I've been avoiding Win7, but I know it's in my future :-(

Does Win7 have "Compatibility Mode"?

Yes it does. I've been using it for old 32-bit legacy stuff. And so far
it's been good. It's not perferct, but allows drive access and network
access.
As well as direct hardware hooks for serial ports LPT ports and USB
ports. You have to download it separately, it's called XPmode.
DOSBOX also works well for older DOS programs.

Cheers
 
M

Martin Riddle

Jan 1, 1970
0
Les Cargill said:
No. I do not believe they can buy new licenses.

There are still some floating around. Other wise you can go thru hoops
and get the license and Images for XP embedded.
which is XP but tailored for the hardware that it runs on. The SDK to
create the image is about $3K, or you can get a freelancer to create a
image for a few hundred dollars. XP embedded is essentially XP with
certain components turned ON or OFF. This is purely OEM stuff but it
may be possible to get an image for a system or two. The actually
License is only $70 from a MS partner aka Arrow Elect or others. but you
will still need to find drivers for the new hardware for XP.

Cheers
 
T

Tom Del Rosso

Jan 1, 1970
0
IMHO, the only reason for using processors with 64 bit virtual address
space is large data bases.

You mean running several VM's with a few GB each is not a valid reason?

Maybe it wouldn't be if there was any hardware or OS support for 36-bit
addressing.
 
WinXP will only address 3.5GB of ram - regardless of how much ram is
physically installed.

In most cases, why would anyone put that amount of code and data into
a single virtual address space ? After all, there are quite efficient
means of communication between address spaces.

The real issue with 32 bit WinXXX is that the virtual address pace is
"polluted" by system DLLs loaded at default virtual addresses,
effectively fragmenting the available address space. Trying to get
more than a few hundred MiB of _continuous_ address space for shared
memory sections or memory mapped files can be a challenge, long
before the 2-3-3.5 GiB user mode virtual address space is exhausted.
 
L

Les Cargill

Jan 1, 1970
0
John said:
Don't give up your XT until all of your software will run else where.
If separate machines are undesirable, I am happy with kvm switching.

Hopefully, some one will come up with a vm that will really work with
Win7.

No, really - the VM solutions for Win7 work just fine. You can't
load PCI device drivers, but them's breaks. You can load
USB device drivers.

http://www.vmlite.com/
Win7 is good at what it does, but it requires that you learn to read &
write its language and to out flank the really weird stuff. I am still
unsure if I really stored a file in the folder I meant to. Sometimes
Drag & Dropping just loses the load!
Windows explorer is a poor representation of how data is really stored
in the machine...

cp -r -f <source> <dest> works great.

http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/
 
F

Fred Abse

Jan 1, 1970
0
cp -r -f <source> <dest> works great.

Am I to understand that Win 7, which is what was being discussed,
understands Unix commands?
 
L

Les Cargill

Jan 1, 1970
0
Fred said:
Am I to understand that Win 7, which is what was being discussed,
understands Unix commands?

I posted a link to a package. You have to install that first.
 
R

Rich Webb

Jan 1, 1970
0
Am I to understand that Win 7, which is what was being discussed,
understands Unix commands?

Actually, it kinda sorta does. Launch "All Programs | Accessories |
System Tools | Windows PowerShell | Windows PowerShell" and you'll get a
CLI window that understands classic shell commands in Microsoft's own
very special way.

I'm sticking with MinGW and MSys on the Windows side.
 
Top