Saturday February 11, 2012 10:03 AM AEST

Atomic MPC > News > Build > Operating Systems > Windows 7's XP Mode isn't all it's cracked up to be

Windows 7's XP Mode isn't all it's cracked up to be

By Justin Robinson
16:13 Apr 30, 2009 | 23 Comments
Tags: Windows | 7 | XP | XPM | RC1

Essential Linkage: What the XPM mode in Windows 7 will and won't do for you.

Windows 7, also known in nerdier circles as the best thing since canned bread, has been announced as containing a virtualised Windows XP install known as XPM.

This isn't available on all versions of W7 however; only the Professional, Enterprise and Ultimate versions will be granted access to it as detailed on the Windows Supersite.

It's an almost-seamless use of the old OS too, downloaded as an entirely free and liscensed copy through Microsoft's website for any of the aforementioned versions of Windows 7, but like most things there are some significant drawbacks.

The main one, that is being mentioned in websites across the net, is the requirement for Virtualisation inside the CPU itself (check out both Intel and AMD virtualizing tech for more), and along with that brings a heightened requirement for hardware specs - suggesting a minimum of 2GB to use it.

While XPM mode will allow installation of old programs, as well as integration into Windows 7's start menu, there are a few out there who believe this is a very dodgy move by Microsoft, such as Charlie Demerjian from TheInquirer.

He's released a very large opinion-based piece on the issue, in which he says will leave computers open to viruses as well as causing unreasonable demands on hardware:

To make matters funnier, all those virtual devices will take their toll on speed, so it won't run fast at all without very modern hardware. Add in the fact that you will need all of the resources to run Windows 7 PLUS all of the resources you need to run Windows XP. From what we hear, Microsoft recommends 2GB of memory for Windows 7, but then again, it also said you could run Vista in 512MB. Har har. Upgrading to Windows 7 on older hardware promises to be a very poor choice.

So, what you will get with XPM is not an XP machine but a bloated resource hog that emulates the worst of 2004. Slowly. It may be a good fit for green screen COBOL apps that won't run on the Broken OS, but that is about it, and you will pay for the 'privilege' in terms of resources used and speed of operation.

Both the released news and TheInquirer story are worth a read, but ultimately it will be left to the official public release candidate of Windows 7 before any of these features will definitely be a problem.

Behind the scenes with Mass Effect 3! GTX 560 VGA round-up! Essential Skyrim tweaks to improve your game! Plus reviews, news, hardware, more games, and easy to following modding guides for PC builders. ON SALE NOW!

Ads by Google

23 Comments

Lambo Apr 30, 2009 5:08 PM	If you need XP compatiblity guarenteed then why on earth would you run Vista/Windows 7? Or more importantly why wouldn't you just dual boot? Shouldn't the fact they even put virtualised XP environment in, in the first place be a step in the right direction?
Just_Some_Guy Apr 30, 2009 5:14 PM	"only the Professional, Enterprise and Ultimate versions..." Yet another ripoff. XP was only two versions ago; one version when consider that Windows 7 is really Vista SP3.
AIMBOT Apr 30, 2009 6:04 PM	What nonsence. Vista is awesome, and now very well priced. There are several versions for VERY GOOD REASONS. I wouldn’t expect to run the Ultimate version on a netbook, so have an idea before you go calling it a ripoff. I needed XP support for some enterprise applications, so I used Microsoft Virtual PC. Works like a charm, crazy fast too – I don’t see why XPM would be any different.
snappalicious Apr 30, 2009 6:26 PM	Im with AIMBOT... I work in computer retail and it seems everyone thinks Vista is crap - either after using it for 5 minutes or on the recommendation of their 'computer mate'. I've been using Vista for 18 months and am yet to find a reason not to like it... I think microsoft get a bad rap sometimes that isn't always deserved... C'mon a virtual XP thats a completely free download... It seems like a pretty good idea to me...
Tezlin Apr 30, 2009 6:45 PM	snappa, did you read the same thing I did? It says it would be an incredible resource hog that would require alot of memory. >.> Not very enticing to me, to be honest.
.:Cyb3rGlitch:. Apr 30, 2009 7:22 PM	Err, how about we wait for the XPM beta before we start talking crap.
Just_Some_Guy Apr 30, 2009 7:55 PM	"C'mon a virtual XP thats a completely free download... It seems like a pretty good idea to me..." That's completely free if you buy one of the expensive versions of Windows 7. Yet again, this 'feature' (backwards compatibility with previous versions) was free in previous versions, will now effectively come at an incremental cost.
.:Cyb3rGlitch:. Apr 30, 2009 8:09 PM	Your logic is flawed Just_Some_Guy. Everyone knows that progress CAN'T be made if legacy applications need to be cated for indefinitely. It shits me that people are attacking Microsoft for trying to help people make the transition to a newer, better, OS. I just don't see the logic, I really can't. And it makes me sad. Windows 7 has the same compatibility as Vista, which as anyone with half a brain knows, is quite good. The fact that MS are giving its users the ability to run XP natively in the OS is an excellent great idea. Heck, it means they can strip out the legacy code from 7 alltogether, and do away with more overhead. And no, XMP doesn't add to the overhead, AFAIK, it runs on demand. And if they do decide to have it run at all times, and you have no need for it, you could just disable it. It's clearly a win win situation. There are no problem here, rather, just an article based on journalistic trolling. A classic The Inquirer bullshit fest.
Sir Mean Mr. Mustard Apr 30, 2009 8:16 PM	This is a sad un-educated rant I’m not going to honor it with a rational response -Learn the facts -Learn that windows cannot be 100% compatible to windows 1.0, and quit bitching about it -If you don’t like it go use Linux because Mac OS isn’t going to give you ½ the amount of backwards compatibility as Windows -Quit complaining when MS do something to help BUSINESSES and don’t bitch about it not being on a HOME OS where it will never be used -If you that that load of shit is worth a read… then suicide is worth a try
fliptopia Apr 30, 2009 9:04 PM	i think the main problem is that vista, for most people, still has no compelling reason to make people want to change at the moment. It remains to be seen if windows 7 is enough to make them let go of an OS they feel comfortable with.
milamber_of_the_assembly Apr 30, 2009 9:07 PM	Mean Mr. Mustard is right. Apple rapes backwards compatible, for instance, just in the last revision of their hardware they changed all the drivers rooting over our entire Macintosh imaging system at work. I have spent the last couple of months re-creating everything with the new version of Leopard so that it will all work together. And in antoher 6-8 months i'll have to do it again. I actually like this idea, I'll hold my opinion on resource usage till i actually get to play with XPM, however, if it perfroms well enough to do some video editing on it, perhaps Microsoft will be able to start stripping out legacy code from Windows itself. That alone would make Windows probably a billion times faster (and i'm only slightly exaggerating) I'm getting that RC1 from technet right now and boy am i looking forward to the beta for XPM. M
LordBug Apr 30, 2009 10:16 PM	I can't believe that the article is pathetic enough to make 2GB of RAM sound like a huge deal. Hasn't it almost reached a stage where a stick of RAM is cheaper than a bag of chips? I migrated from 98se to Vista. I liked XP, but it just didn't do it for me. I'll admit, I had no choice about Vista, and was going to revert to XP... But Vista really grew on me, and when I try XP nowadays, it just sucks bollocks. I look forwards to W7. 7 is a lucky number in my books for a start :)
MrPodgy Apr 30, 2009 11:58 PM	this smacks of WINDOWS 98 and people not wanting to move to 2000 for the same reason. when i moved to 2000 i felt in some ways the tweakability of the system and decided from 98 to xp i trudged. was a little against XP at the start but got used to the OS and then decided that 98 was too 'antiquiated' to bother with.... all it needs is time.
MrPodgy Apr 30, 2009 11:59 PM	sorry edit from tweakability of the system had been taken.... etc etc
AnthraxPants May 1, 2009 4:49 AM	I think it will probably turn out to be a good idea. Users will not need XP drivers for new hardware in situations where they want XP compatibility for old software or because they are fussy. I would imagine any decent system that can comfortably run Win 7 should handle XPM quite easily. There are customers out there who try Vista for only 5 minutes on their new laptop and then insist that they want XP installed instead so they can run "Antiquated Software X" (or sometimes they are just fussy). It can be a real pain to track down XP drivers for systems such as new laptops that only come with support for Vista. XPM could potentially do away with this problem in Win 7.
Athiril May 1, 2009 6:49 AM	"Microsoft recommends 2GB of memory for Windows 7, but then again, it also said you could run Vista in 512MB. Har har. Upgrading to Windows 7 on older hardware promises to be a very poor choice." Windows 7 runs a frack load better out of the box than Vista in my experience.
kikz May 1, 2009 7:12 AM	What is wrong with people? They expect EVERYTHING. They want a perfectly secure OS with all the bells and whistles as well as having it run all their legacy applications (that were not designed for the new operating system). If the applications in questions are LOB apps, then don't upgrade to windows 7. Why would you when the majority of your work at work is done in an app for an older system. Upgrading for the sake of upgrading is something that atomicans do, not business users :p Another option for business users is to shell out a few more hundred bucks for extra horsepower. RAM is cheap. To me, it makes sense that XPM is only in business facing variants of Windows 7. How dare I, as a home user get pissy because I've upgraded my operating system and my games that were meant to run on XP or Vista don't run on Windows 7. Frankly, if you buy an application that is certified to work on platform X or operating system X, taking it to platform Y or operating system Y and having it work is an added bonus, not a mandatory. Backwards compatibility is a thorn in the side of software and hardware progression.
kikz May 1, 2009 7:15 AM	...As far as business users are concerned it (resources) shouldn't be too much of a problem. I currently concurrently run 2-3 Virtual Server 2005 VM's of win2k3 server on my Vista Ultimate box at work with no problems. On a Q6600 at stock speeds with 3.35GB ram and a 32bit OS.
Demonic May 1, 2009 9:27 AM	What an opionated idiot obviously bias, i'm exactly with Aimbot, i use Vista fully quad core, large memory it's all far better on Vista. I'll be jumping right on board with Windows 7, the beta already looks so good, XPM will be a great addition right out of the box no extra work needed to get Virtual Machines setup, away i go. What a moron in the above article if you want a fast reliable XP environment run XP if you want the odd program to be compatible whislt running the latest and greatest get Windows 7
Achillesjg May 1, 2009 1:31 PM	Tezlin, remember that this piece is an opinion, and not based on the actual product. This guy is telling us what he sees in his crystal ball.
Apocrypha May 1, 2009 2:39 PM	Charlie's "crystal ball" has not an ounce of truth, credibility, or fact, ffs. Opinion = fail in the tech industry. The whole population of geeks, enthusiasts, IT admins etc etc only care about REAL DATA and FACTS. Atomic, can we please stop posting Inquirer shit here? PLEASE?
TheFrunj May 1, 2009 3:59 PM	Apocrypha, it wasn't said anywhere that it was fact. Read it, and you'll see that it mentions "opinion-based piece" explicitly. It was included merely as one opinion on the subject, one that I felt was worth a read. If you don't think so, don't read it - simple. -JR
V1RUS May 7, 2009 10:18 PM	AIMBOT yes it is a rip off but windows 7 is the big one vista was the little ice breakign in the middle not a full proper os man

Comments have been disabled on this article.

Latest Competitions

Thermaltake kicks off your gaming year with a BANG
Thermaltake has started off the new year with a bang by giving away a Tt eSport Theron Laser mouse to not one or two, but TWENTY lucky Atomicans!

Atomic Magazine

Issue: 133 | February, 2012

Atomic is a magazine aimed squarely at computer enthusiasts, gamers, and serious PC upgraders.

Every month we bring you the latest reviews of new technology and PC components, in depth features on everything from overclocking to console hacking, and gaming previews and interviews.

What's in this issue?