Ask Slashdot: Best 32-Bit Windows System In 2012?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ask Slashdot: Best 32-Bit Windows System In 2012?

Posted by timothy on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @03:28AM from the looking-backwards-fondly dept.

First time accepted submitter justthinkit writes "I have a number of applications that will not run on 64-bit Windows, but I would like to gain the benefits (most better caching) of having more than 4GB of RAM. Am I stuck with these Windows operating systems? And why is Windows Server 2008 Datacenter and Enterprise not included on that page? Should I go with a Linux or Win 7/8 system, and run a VM of Windows XP? Is this a solved problem or a lost cause?"

49 of 313 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Windows 7 compatibility mode by pak9rabid · 2012-11-13 03:31 · Score: 5, Interesting

What's wrong with running Windows 7 x64, and running your 32-bit applications in compatibility mode?
1. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by mastershake82 · 2012-11-13 03:34 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Generally, if they have applications that will not run on 64-bit Windows, it is because the applications are 16-bit, not 32-bit.
2. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Spad · 2012-11-13 03:41 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Or they have shoddy legacy code that checks for 64-bit systems and refuses to run on them in the same way that a lot of older websites still keep insisting that you upgrade to IE6 in order to view them in their full glory because someone did a != instead of a =
3. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Spad · 2012-11-13 03:42 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  <=, obviously
4. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by adonoman · 2012-11-13 03:47 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  XP mode on 64-bit Windows 7 can run most 16-bit apps.
5. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Chris+Mattern · 2012-11-13 03:51 · Score: 2
  
  No, it can't. I don't think you realize how archaic 16-bit mode is. 16-bit mode was for running on *286* Windows. If you had a 386 you ran in 32 bits.
6. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by tgd · 2012-11-13 03:57 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  No, it can't. I don't think you realize how archaic 16-bit mode is. 16-bit mode was for running on *286* Windows. If you had a 386 you ran in 32 bits.
  No, he's correct. You're talking about WoW32, he's talking about XP Mode. XP Mode is "Windows Virtual PC" and runs XP. 16 bit apps run fine in there.
  They won't run in WoW, because the 16 bit support is a different subsystem in Windows, its not part of Win32.
7. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Runaway1956 · 2012-11-13 04:16 · Score: 2
  
  I've scrolled down the page, and read a lot of good answers. With a little consideration, I have to agree with those who suggest, "It's time to upgrade your software!" As has already been pointed out, 16 bit software was on it's way out when the 386 processor came of the manufacturing lines. 16 bit software was carried by sneakernet on floppy drives - both 5 and 3 inch. 16 bit software predates Windows 3.1. Dump that shit, and pay some zit-faced intern to code something to do what you need. The intern can give you something at least as reliable as the crap that was written to run on a 286 or earlier processor.
  If you need something more reliable than zit-face can offer, then hire a programmer. Any job that was done once, can be done again. Your software is replaceable.
  Start over, choose an operating system, tell the programmer what you need to do, let him choose a language, then get the hell out of his way. He'll call you when he has questions, or needs you to test something.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
8. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by 0123456 · 2012-11-13 04:22 · Score: 2
  
  No, Windows 3.x could also run 32-bit apps. Windows 95 just replaced some of the 16-bit layer with 32-bit code, for example display drivers were still 16-bit.
  NT was the first fully 32-bit Windows, and the biggest issue with Windows 95 programs is that many of them were 32-bit but used 16-bit installers; you can run them on 64-bit Windows 7, but you can't install them.
9. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Anonymous Coward · 2012-11-13 04:29 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Did you try it in Windows 7's XP mode, which actually starts a copy of XP in a virtual machine?
10. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by neokushan · 2012-11-13 04:34 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Ahhh, I think I understand what you mean now. By "XP mode", you're in fact referring to this: http://windows.microsoft.com/is-IS/windows7/products/features/windows-xp-mode
  When silly me was thinking of this: http://filext.com/images/vista_compatibility_mode.gif
  Yes, the former will work for 16-bit applications. For those reading this thread, I should point out that "XP Mode" is not installed by default in Windows 7 or anything but it is a worthwhile addon if you run legacy apps.
  
  --
  +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
11. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Anonymous Coward · 2012-11-13 04:36 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  For all you know he's got a 15 year old piece of industrial kit that needs 15 year old software to interface with it. Assembly line equipment maybe, oil drilling gear, CNC stuff, who the hell knows. A lot of this stuff is unsupported or the original vendor has vanished. Maybe this hardware still has years of life left in it, and the replacement value could be in the millions.
12. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by orangesquid · 2012-11-13 04:46 · Score: 2
  
  Oftentimes, in industrial settings, a certain instrument has certain certifications. In order to make products that comply with various laws (like medical or automotive components), the materials have to meet certain standards. Legally, they only meed those standards if you can demonstrate that you are making measurements with certified instruments. Frequently it is the case that the instruments are only supported by a proprietary codebase, and the manufacturers do not have a functional app that runs on any modern OS.
  In other words, it may cost tens of millions of dollars to "upgrade the app," because you have to re-build parts of your manufacturing process. Sometimes getting a new instrument certified can take years.
  This is also the reason why hiring an intern is often not an option. Sure, the intern may be able to hack some code together (of course, then you might have violated reverse engineering statutes or patents on communication protocols or algorithms that process the data from the instruments, so be prepared for tens of millions of dollars to settle out-of-court or buy licensing), but you still have to get everything re-certified---if it's even legal to do so, since you're not using the manufacturer's applications---and re-certifying an old instrument that is using a third-party app may not even be possible, since frequently the manufacturer has to certify that an instrument is working properly and will refuse to work with third-party apps under the premise that they might disclose trade secrets by doing so.
  This may sound preposterous, but it does happen. One place I worked finally got rid of their VAXstation 3100 running VMS4 just a few years ago when they upgraded to a new instrument (which costs millions and took years, but they had to do it to run different tests in order to make some different/new products that met certain standards).
  
  --
  --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
13. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by lister+king+of+smeg · 2012-11-13 05:18 · Score: 2
  
  Hey you car has a flat tire you are going to go invent a new wheel.
  {sarcasm} yes we should have to rewrite every program (from scratch) we ever encounter a problem with instead of looking for another solution because we all have unlimited time and no other things that need done{/sarcasim}
  
  --
  ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
14. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Runaway1956 · 2012-11-13 05:27 · Score: 2
  
  You make some pretty good points there - but - I do have machinery and equipment at work such as you describe. Now, putting myself into the OP's shoes, if I were to come to slashdot, I would spell out what type of machinery I was running, and what was required to make that machinery run. Some of our machinery is over thirty years old, quite a lot of it over twenty. Most of our stuff runs on Linux. Machinery that is older than Linux is slowly being phased out - the last of it should be gone in another three years.
  So, you see, I actually gave your points a couple of thoughts as I was browsing. OP makes no mention of such requirements, so I dismissed those thoughts.
  You will note that he seeming #1 priority is access to more than 4 gig of memory, not meeting any special requirements of dinosaur machines and/or laws. ;)
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
15. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by minijedimaster · 2012-11-13 05:29 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  No, it isn't. It is XP 32bit. Looking at mine now, "Windows XP Professional" "Service Pack 3". No 64bit mentioned at all in the system properties. I don't think XP 64bit ever had a SP3 either.
16. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Jaysyn · 2012-11-13 05:31 · Score: 2
  
  I take this back. Just tried running Catfish again & it works fine. It was the Palm Pilot drivers that refused to work for me.
  
  --
  There is a war going on for your mind.
17. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Anonymous Coward · 2012-11-13 05:39 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Yes it *will*. That's what it's for. It's Windows XP, running in Virtual PC, with added patches so you can run seamless apps, Citrix style.
  If you are using hardware with your 64 bit OS, the yes, you will require 64 bit drivers for it.
  The later, will not.
18. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by afidel · 2012-11-13 06:32 · Score: 2
  
  No, 3.x could not run 32bit Windows apps out of the box, after NT 3 shipped they did later backport a subset of the Win32 API to 3.x, this was called Win32s and it was a separate download.
  
  --
  There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
19. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by operagost · 2012-11-13 07:27 · Score: 2
  
  DOS was never 8-bit software. The 8088 and 8086 were 16 bit processors and DOS was written specifically for them.
  
  --
  
  Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
20. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by Guspaz · 2012-11-13 07:45 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Considering "XP Mode" in Windows 7 is a complete copy of XP running in VirtualPC, it's a perfectly reasonable (and accurate) claim to make. That was the whole point of XP mode, after all.
21. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by petermgreen · 2012-11-13 07:56 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  BTW wine can run 16-bit windows apps on 64-bit linux.
  
  --
  note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
22. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by cbhacking · 2012-11-13 09:03 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  this add-on is news to me as well. I always thought XP mode meant the compatibility mode. This is more like a XP VM on 7.
  That's actually *exactly* what it is. It uses Microsoft's (now discontinued, but still available for Win7) Virtual PC virtualization software to run 32-bit XP in a hidden root window, and then uses the Remote Desktop protocol to forward the windows from XP to Win7 so that you can interact with them and they appear on your Win7 taskbar. Some additional integration takes care of things like adding apps to the Win7 Start Menu when they are installed in the Virtual XP machine.
  You can also run the virtual XP machine as a normal VM, with a visible root window and all, if you choose to. This allows you to do things like install OS and software updates (automatic updates are enabled by default, but you may want to mess with that anyhow). Furthermore, you can forward USB ports from the Win7 host to the XP VM. This is great for things like using legacy hardware that doesn't work on Win7.
  
  --
  There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
23. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by hairyfeet · 2012-11-13 09:07 · Score: 2
  
  You sure can Jaruzel, here is how it works...you set up the RAMDisk to be the same size as the unusable RAM, in your case 800Mb and change, and set it to run on boot. Then you simply point any programs you want sped up, from your browser to windows temp itself, to use this RAMdisk as the place to store their temp files. Since RAM is soooo much faster than even the fastest SSD any reads and writes to the RAMdisk are practically instant so you can turn that lost RAM into something you can actually use.
  You still might want to pick up a copy of Windows X64, simply because XP is only supported until 2014 and you can get win 8 (shudder, give me Win 7 any day of the week) for just $40 until Jan 17th so even if you stick with XP for now at least you'll have a migration strategy in place, you can also use Start8 to give Win 8 the Win 7 start menu, doesn't fix all the UI problems but it does help.
  Now for as to showing you how here you go and unlike most RAMdisk software this one is 100% free with no size limitations simply download the software (link provided0 and follow the instructions, it couldn't be more simple. After you are finished voila! You will have another drive listed in windows made of the 800Mb of RAM that had been sitting there wasted.
  If you don't mind spending a little money to get more out of that RAM I'd suggest that you simply bookmark the previous link and go download the trial of eBoostr as it not only allows you to use what it calls "hidden RAM" aka the RAM Windows can't see but it gives you most of the advantages of Readyboost, such as pre-caching a copy of most used programs into the RAMDisk so they'll launch quicker, without you needing to do anything yourself, once its installed its pretty much "set and forget" as it'll take care of everything on its own.
  But whichever way you go you'll be able to actually use that 800mb instead of just having it go to waste, enjoy!
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
24. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by RaceProUK · 2012-11-14 00:51 · Score: 2
  
  sizeof(int*) == 32
  Probably not legal C, but close enough.
  
  --
  No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
25. Re:Windows 7 compatibility mode by crutchy · 2012-11-15 18:34 · Score: 2
  
  i have personally got 16 bit apps to work in xp mode (which is basically a virtual machine with xp), except that i think xp mode only works on win7 ultimate, so home users might be shit outta luck
Depends on the 3D by Krneki · 2012-11-13 03:32 · Score: 5, Informative

Do you need 3D accelerated graphics? If not, VM is the way to go. Just RDP to the machine and do what you have to do.

--
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
1. Re:Depends on the 3D by bmo · 2012-11-13 05:30 · Score: 2
  
  >Do you need 3D accelerated graphics? If not, VM is the way to go.
  After ignoring the Windows 3D driver for VirtualBox, I installed it and ran Neverball, a 3D table-tilt ball game.
  It worked fine.
  --
  BMO
4GB memory vs. 32-bit apps... by xxxJonBoyxxx · 2012-11-13 03:36 · Score: 3, Informative

>> I have a number of applications that will not run on 64-bit Windows, but I would like...more than 4GB of RAM
Do you realize that many of your 32-bit applications would freak out in a 4GB memory space?
1. Re:4GB memory vs. 32-bit apps... by The+MAZZTer · 2012-11-13 03:40 · Score: 2
  
  Each process is limited to 2gb but you can run multiple processes.
2. Re:4GB memory vs. 32-bit apps... by Minwee · 2012-11-13 03:42 · Score: 2
  
  >> I have a number of applications that will not run on 64-bit Windows, but I would like...more than 4GB of RAM
  Do you realize that many of your 32-bit applications would freak out in a 4GB memory space?
  "...to gain the benefits (most better caching) of having...". That's the part you cut out, and it clearly points out one example of how the operating system can benefit from having more physical memory without having to assign it all to a single process. That's the way that virtual memory works -- The OS can have a huge pool of memory while each process only sees a small portion of it.
3. Re:4GB memory vs. 32-bit apps... by 0123456 · 2012-11-13 04:24 · Score: 2
  
  Some Windows apps do stupid things and crash when they see a 'negative' memory address (i.e. > 2GB). But they're pretty rare these days since so many people run 32-bit apps on 64-bit Windows.
SysWOW64 by VIPERsssss · 2012-11-13 03:37 · Score: 2

I've gotten some cranky Win32 apps to work on Win7 64 by getting the 32-bit dll files in the C:\Windows\SysWOW64 folder instead of C:\Windows\System32.
The naming conventions don't make any damn sense; they should have kept System32 for 32-bit files and created System64 for 64-bit files. But that's just me.

--
We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion.
1. Re:SysWOW64 by neokushan · 2012-11-13 04:08 · Score: 2
  
  Actually I think I've found a reasonable source that explains it:
  http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ff955767.aspx
  So originally it was for 32bit DLLS, then Windows 95 went and ruined it anyway by putting 16 and 32bit stuff together (gj, microsoft). However these days the reason they do it is for .bat scripts that were hard coded to use System32 to do things like update the registry - the .bat would be running as a 64bit process but the hardcoded path to System32 would mean it would attempt to run a 32bit regedit.exe (for example), causing it to fail in doing what it was meant to do. So basically, the whole SysWOW64 thing is for backwards compatibility.
  
  --
  +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
Re:VMs are not CPU emulators by Joce640k · 2012-11-13 03:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

A VM can have a 32-bit OS installed.

--
No sig today...
Re:VMs are not CPU emulators by djsmiley · 2012-11-13 03:39 · Score: 4, Funny

VM's can fake a 32bit cpu.... its almost like there isn't a real CPU and someone is just pretending or something...

--
- http://www.milkme.co.uk
Use a VM for all older software. by concealment · 2012-11-13 03:40 · Score: 4, Insightful

Think about this critically: you probably want your operating system to be the master of its new hardware, and then you want it to interpret the needs of your older software.
If compatibility mode won't do it, set yourself up a VM and run everything in there. You can share a drive with the host OS and thus be nearly transparent.
It doesn't make sense to me to hobble the OS in order to run older software, when the newer OS is better with the newer hardware.
Your answers with as much detail as you provided. by djsmiley · 2012-11-13 03:42 · Score: 5, Funny

1. Yes
2. Dunno
3. Yes
4. Yes
5.... errm yes?

--
- http://www.milkme.co.uk
Windows memory limitations by ilsaloving · 2012-11-13 03:51 · Score: 3, Informative

First and foremost, all consumer 32-bit windows versions are licensed to top out at 4GB. If you want more than 4GB, you will have to buy a (reassuringly expensive) server edition that permits it. Done. End of story.
The only other alternative is to get a 64-bit version of Windows 7 Pro. The Professional (and up) versions of Windows include something called compatibility mode, which is a free copy of Windows XP 32-bit, running inside a virtual machine. That's probably going to be your most cost-effective way of running your legacy apps on top of a 64-bit machine with oodles of RAM.
1. Re:Windows memory limitations by PremiumCarrion · 2012-11-13 06:47 · Score: 2
  
  Pretty much since the Pentium Pro Intel processors have had a 36bit physical memory addressing system hidden within. This is how enterprise versions of the operating system and SQL server allow >4GB RAM. SQL calls it AWE Address Windowing Extensions, I think Enterprise edition of 2003 allowed it also. The claimed logic by microsoft was that drivers for consumer versions of windows wouldn't handle the addresses properly and this would lead to very unstable operating systems.
2. Re:Windows memory limitations by cbhacking · 2012-11-13 09:30 · Score: 2
  
  You're mostly right, and Rexdude is mostly wrong. All 32-bit versions of Windows support PAE. Among other things, PAE is required for the NX bit, which is used for Data Execute Prevention (since Windows XP). You can force-disable PAE in the bootloader, but by default it is enabled.
  However, the client builds of Windows (as opposed to the server builds) limit the amount of addressable memory to 4GB nonetheless, even though PAE supports more. This restriction is not present in the server builds. The ostensible reason is that Client is much more likely to install older / sketchier drivers, and some drivers expect pointers to be 32 bits and will freak the hell out if they get a 36-bit pointer (where "freak the hell out" typically just means crash, quite possibly with data corruption). Therefore, the client builds' memory manager never exposes more than 4GB. However, since the difference in terms of actual binary kernel code between the client and server OS builds is almost nonexistent, it's a valid argument that the 32-bit limitation is simply by license.
  
  --
  There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Re:What the OP by damnbunni · 2012-11-13 03:55 · Score: 2

I suspect their problem is that they have 16 bit Windows code to run. 64 bit Windows can't run 16 bit code.
16 bit Windows code will work in 32 bit Windows (any version) or a 32 bit Windows running in a virtual machine on a 64 bit OS.
(Myself, I keep an old Win98 laptop around to run Quicken 6 on. Why? It's the only thing that can sync with the version of Pocket Quicken I have decades of checkbook data in. And it's 16 bit Windows 3.1 code.)
Re:VMs are not CPU emulators by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-11-13 04:07 · Score: 2

The guest CPU is the same as the host CPU on all popular VM solutions. If there is something in your applications that fails in the presence of a 64bit CPU, a VM isn't going to solve your problem.
I'm sure some thrifty assembly jockey writing vital-but-dreadful line of business applications in the 80s has a counterexample; but the mere presence of a 64bit CPU shouldn't cause any trouble for 16 bit applications. The issue is that MS dropped support for 16 bit applications on all 64-bit OS builds. A 32-bit OS on a CPU that supports 64 bits will run 16 bit applications without incident; but will only be able to use the first 4GB of address space without PAE, hence the poster's desire for a 32 bit OS with PAE support.
Windows 7 32bit 4GB Kernel Hack by mcnazar · 2012-11-13 04:08 · Score: 2

Not sure if this is of any use but the Windows 7 32bit Kernel can be hacked to properly support PAE and allow 64GB accessible memory under W7 32bit. W7 32bit was supposed include full PAE support but was nurfed at the last moment due to third party device drivers getting confused over the > 4GB memory space (I never had this issue).
A couple caveats come to mind:
# You have to patch the 32bit Kernel. Linky: http://superuser.com/a/95309
# Although you have access to >4GB of memory, no single process can use more than 4GB (minus graphics card memory)
I have used such a setup under W7 32bit SP1 for the last six months without issue as I needed the extra memory to run multiple VMs simultaneously.
HTH and good luck!
See if you can upgrade or replace them by Sycraft-fu · 2012-11-13 04:11 · Score: 2

Seriously, it is real, real hard for me to find programs that don't run on 64-bit Windows these days. Windows has a flawless 32-bit user mode compatibility layer, so all 32-bit apps run no problem. The only cases that you have problems are:
1) Kernel mode stuff. There is no 32-bit kernel mode shit on 64-bit.
2) 16-bit programs. 64-bit Windows does have the 16-bit compatibility layer since there's no 16-bit mode you can access form long mode on the CPU.
3) Stupid programs that check the version and fail out, even though they'd actually run.
There just aren't many of those anymore. We use some amazingly fussy engineering programs at work, and they all run on 64-bit Windows these days.
So if your software really won't work, look and see if there's an update, or something else that'll do the job. If you just haven't tried it, then try it. Get a copy of 7 64-bit and see. I bet you have no problems. If you really have old 16-bit programs you need to run, do it in a VM, they can't benefit from modern system resources anyhow.
Re:Linux with some kind of compatibility layer by hobarrera · 2012-11-13 04:13 · Score: 2

Indeed. I've found that some old applications (especially games from around 1999), tend to work on wine, while they fail to run on Windows > XP.
They may be few, but it's worth a try.
Re:VMs are not CPU emulators by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-11-13 04:18 · Score: 3, Interesting

A 64bit CPU can have a 32bit OS installed. That's not the point. If the 64bit CPU is what causes his applications to fail (and not some software environment problem), then running the OS in a VM won't help because it doesn't change the CPU that the application will see. VMs are not CPU emulators. The code inside the VM runs on the host CPU.
No VM built for resource management convenience in a standard production environment is a CPU emulator, because that's horribly inefficient compared to doing passthrough. If you don't mind incurring substantial overhead, though, something like QEMU can do full emulation of an x86, ARM, MIPS, or SPARC CPU. Not at all fast, compared to passthrough(also supported with KVM or xen); but it can be done.
Re:You do realize you can run things in 32 bit mod by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-11-13 04:23 · Score: 4, Informative

However you also have to deal with developers who's apps actually check what version you're running and won't even try to install.
It isn't much fun; but the Microsoft Application Compatibility Toolkit provides a mechanism for telling a large number of potentially useful lies to a program about the environment it is living in... Figuring out which ones you need is an exercise for the reader; but if you manage it you can then have the OS automatically furnish those little falsehoods every time the designated program runs.
It's a more powerful and granular version of the 'run in compatibility mode' feature, designed to keep the whiny enterprise customers happy.
Windows 7 x64 with XP Mode by TrekkieTechie · 2012-11-13 04:46 · Score: 5, Informative

This was briefly mentioned earlier, but I wanted to state clearly and concisely:
Windows 7 Professional, Enterprise, and Ultimate all include licensing for Windows XP Mode, a 32-bit virtualized instance of Windows XP SP3. It is an additional download (actually a couple downloads), but it is free. I use it every day at work (on my 64-bit Win7 machine) to run a 16-bit app that was written in 1992, while I wait for that app's replacement to be written. It works perfectly, in fact much better than VirtualBox did for the same use case (there was laggy/odd redrawing issues with VirtualBox, no matter how many resources I allocated to the virtual machine).