throwing in the towel on win2000

T

tmanwell@yahoo.com

Junior Member
Well,
I think I'm throwing in the towel on win2000. I've tried at least a half dozen different installations, doing various things differently. (custom vs typical, etc. etc.) The one thing they all have in common is that as soon as I try to install an application, the vm crashes on me. I've sent e-mail to Parallels asking for help, but have heard nothing.

I *can't* see spending more $$ to try this product with XP (I don't currently own XP), so now I guess I'm reduced to trying it with Win98. from what I've read, this will be clunky at best, but right now I have absolutely nothing to show for my $80.

All I can think of is that either there's some STEP in the process I'm missing--like before I install my first app, I'm supposed to hop on one foot while howling at the moon--or my win2000 install cd (an upgrade cd from win98) is somehow not supported in this process. I looked at the slipstream process, & I was even a sharp enough cookie to be able to mostly build a sp4 win2000 disk, but the last part about making it bootable hung me up. Besides, I have the sp4 file on separate cd anyway. Tried my vm build both with & without it, but again, always crashed when loading an app.
Regardless, NEVER had this problem with Guestpc on the old mac....
 
have you tried making a VM with win 98, then using the upgrade CD on that?
I have had Win2K running with no problem for at least 6 months. BUT it was a full install CD not an upgrade. I have installed XP and Vista on client computers and they all work fine. Also be sure there is lots of free space on the HD and it is free of defects on the mac side first.
fyi, from what I have seen parallels hates working with upgrade disks
 
well, I am trying to install win98 right now. If I can get that vm up & running, I MAY try the win2k upgrade from there. At this point, I'd just like to see *something* load in a vm. the last win2k vm I made, I tried to intall a simple card game......and as soon as I clicked 'setup' the vm puked on me.
We'll see.

TM
 
as you dont say, do we have to assume youre using build 3188 of parallels ...

have you tried using build 1970 installing your vm and then the Parallels tools, then updating to 3188
 
tmanwell@yahoo.com said:
Well,
I think I'm throwing in the towel on win2000. I've tried at least a half dozen different installations, doing various things differently. (custom vs typical, etc. etc.) The one thing they all have in common is that as soon as I try to install an application, the vm crashes on me. I've sent e-mail to Parallels asking for help, but have heard nothing.

I *can't* see spending more $$ to try this product with XP (I don't currently own XP), so now I guess I'm reduced to trying it with Win98. from what I've read, this will be clunky at best, but right now I have absolutely nothing to show for my $80.

All I can think of is that either there's some STEP in the process I'm missing--like before I install my first app, I'm supposed to hop on one foot while howling at the moon--or my win2000 install cd (an upgrade cd from win98) is somehow not supported in this process. I looked at the slipstream process, & I was even a sharp enough cookie to be able to mostly build a sp4 win2000 disk, but the last part about making it bootable hung me up. Besides, I have the sp4 file on separate cd anyway. Tried my vm build both with & without it, but again, always crashed when loading an app.
Regardless, NEVER had this problem with Guestpc on the old mac....
Click to expand...

Can I point out somethings that are rather obvious?

All of the documentation that I have seen indicate that installation via upgrade CDs -- ie non-Full Version CDs -- is not supported. So the fact that you're finding problems when using an upgrade CD -- for Win 2000 or whatever -- doesn't surprise me in the least.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, Parallels was developed primarily with XP in mind -- not 2000, not 98. Why would you want to put SO MUCH time and effort into trying to support an OS that is now 7 years old?

Get a real copy of XP and do the installation. You'll find everything works a lot better.
 
I can't speak for others, but I use Win2K becasue it runs better than XP, and in a smaller memory footprint. I don't need the fisher price look. All the programs I need run in 2K. Also I don't need microsofts permission to install or change a win2K install.

We mac users are running a what, 30 year old OS (unix)?
 
BarryP13@mac.com said:
I can't speak for others, but I use Win2K becasue it runs better than XP, and in a smaller memory footprint. I don't need the fisher price look. All the programs I need run in 2K. Also I don't need microsofts permission to install or change a win2K install.

We mac users are running a what, 30 year old OS (unix)?
Click to expand...

No, you're running a very new version of a very old idea of a kernel, and the same is true for Windows.

I've never found 2000 to run better than XP, nor better than 98 and I've been using PCs since there was PC-DOS, MS-DOS, DR-DOS, as well as CP/M, etc.
 
if Parallels could run a CP/M VM I would try it :) :)
where to find a USB 5 1/2 inch or 8 inch floppy disk drive :)

CP/M was far superior to DOS

a lot of people will not run any OS newer than win2K because of the validation requirements, as long as the needed programs wil run.
 
BarryP13@mac.com said:
if Parallels could run a CP/M VM I would try it :) :)
where to find a USB 5 1/2 inch or 8 inch floppy disk drive :)

CP/M was far superior to DOS

a lot of people will not run any OS newer than win2K because of the validation requirements, as long as the needed programs wil run.
Click to expand...

...Which is IMO and IME a very crazy and self-defeating position to take. Supporting users world-wide of a very complex and intricate programl, I wouldn't want at all to be dependant on 7 year old technology. And I have never had any problem with authorizing a MS product.
 
XP! Pah!

W2K runs faster, smaller memory load, and no product activation song-and-dance. I use Windows XP every day, and come home to relax with my Macs, and any windows work is on my extensively, and frequently updated PC running W2K. I hate to think of the drama involved if I'd stayed with XP at home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top