"Jakob Bohm" wrote:
Quote:
> nak wrote: Quote:
> > Hey there,
> >
> > I'm just wondering why Hardware Assisted Virtualisation is now
> > mandatory? I mean tbh, whether it was enabled or disabled in Virtual PC
> > 2007 I didn't notice any difference in performance.
> >
> Maybe VPC 2007 didn't use the new technology at all, even if it was
> enabled in the BIOS on the physical computer.
> Quote:
> > Also isn't it a little ironic, a virtualisation technology that's meant
> > to cut down the cost of requiring the physical hardware, when actually
> > allot of us are going to have to upgrade just so we can make use of the
> > latest releases. Wouldn't it have been good if it was an option just
> > like it's always been? I've got 2 computers that can't run Virtual PC
> > Beta and one of them is brand spanking new! lol!
> >
>
> Yes, it is stupid. Microsoft does not (officially at least) make any
> money from the sale of hardware upgrades (although they often use the
> sale of a new PC as an opportunity to sell another copy of Windows at
> the discounted OEM price).
>
> Technically, the deepest core function in any VPC product is the
> "hypervisor" which is responsible for making the Virtual machine think
> it owns its own CPU, even though it really doesn't. This hypervisor
> needs to be implemented differently (and in a more difficult way) on a
> CPU without enabled hardware VT, than when much of the work can be done
> by the VT feature of the CPU.
>
> So if Microsoft was starting from scratch with no older VPC product to
> upgrade, implementing VPC to run only with hardware VT would be the
> easiest/cheapest solution. But Microsoft is not starting from scratch,
> they have a functioning hypervisor for non-VT machines, which they could
> continue to maintain, with higher level code in VPC automatically
> loading either the VT or the non-VT hypervisor depending on machine
> capabilities.
>
> Note that large amounts of "auxiliary" code such as .vhd support, device
> simulation, virtual BIOS, user interface, VPC additions etc. etc. could
> be shared by the two hypervisor implementations, keeping the total cost
> down and allowing VPC images to be shared amongst different physical
> machines. It would also allow VPCs with saved state to survive a change
> in the VT BIOS setting on the Host PC.
>
> --
> Jakob Bøhm, M.Sc.Eng. * jb@xxxxxx * direct tel:+45-45-90-25-33
> Netop Solutions A/S * Bregnerodvej 127 * DK-3460 Birkerod * DENMARK
> http://www.netop.com * tel:+45-45-90-25-25 * fax:+45-45-90-25-26
> Information in this mail is hasty, not binding and may not be right.
> Information in this posting may not be the official position of Netop
> Solutions A/S, only the personal opinions of the author.
>
> Jakob,
The best site for all the up to date news on the product is found at the
Windows 7 support forum, at micorsoft.com/springboard. The site will also
give you all sorts of useful information, such as the “what’s new in the
r.c.” feed….or you can also you use talkingaboutwindows.com as an additional
resource
Thanks,
Glen@xxxxxx-springboard