I have a bootalbe USB built from https://uupdump.net/. Has anybody run this
in Virtual Box on a older computer that does not meet Microsoft's
requirements?

<Bill>

On 9/4/21 1:31 PM, this is what Bill Bradshaw wrote:
> I have a bootalbe USB built from https://uupdump.net/. Has anybody run this
> in Virtual Box on a older computer that does not meet Microsoft's
> requirements?
>
> <Bill>
>
>
IMHO, when you run a virtualbox OS you are not running it on your PC, you're running it in a virtual machine and it has it's own hardware as
specified by VBOX....

But to answer your question, I have a pc that meets the requirements and I have win 11 insider or whatever you want to call it install, yet
it just got upgraded to 2200.176 and now it won't go any further because the VBOX system will not support it. It was good with the first
few 22000.xxx installs, just stopped after the latest update.

I did download that uupdump.net image also. Some good that work did. LOL

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

Big Al wrote:
> On 9/4/21 1:31 PM, this is what Bill Bradshaw wrote:
>> I have a bootalbe USB built from https://uupdump.net/. Has anybody
>> run this
>> in Virtual Box on a older computer that does not meet Microsoft's
>> requirements?
>>
>> <Bill>
>>
>>
> IMHO, when you run a virtualbox OS you are not running it on your PC,
> you're running it in a virtual machine and it has it's own hardware as
> specified by VBOX....
>
> But to answer your question, I have a pc that meets the requirements and
> I have win 11 insider or whatever you want to call it install, yet it
> just got upgraded to 2200.176 and now it won't go any further because
> the VBOX system will not support it. It was good with the first few
> 22000.xxx installs, just stopped after the latest update.
>
> I did download that uupdump.net image also. Some good that work did. LOL
>

I installed 22000.xxx from a Microsoft download, and it worked.

But I think I've already tossed that, as it was just
a quick test of whether the install would finish.

Obviously, some features in the OS are turned off when
you do that. VBox doesn't have a TPM that I'm aware of.
I suppose I could have used the item in Settings to test
for that... There's a place in there to check what kind
of TPM you've got, and whether it is ON or not.

The maturity of the UEFI implementation in VBox isn't
all that good, so I could not properly test UEFI multiboots
inside Vbox in the past. And I don't see any reason
for this situation to change.

When virtualization software provides a "BIOS", it is a
skeletal structure and not a full BIOS implementation. And,
generally speaking, whatever bugs you see in that BIOS on
day one, are there forever and ever. The BIOS design in
hosting software, seems to be contracted out, which means
the "maintenance" on the work done, would likely cost a
lot of money if done on a contract basis. Could be millions
a year for a few lines of code improvement. You would not
expect the people who wrote the existing UEFI or EFI, to
rewrite it and do a better job.

As an example of a BIOS bug in the past, the BIOS enumerates
CPU cores. On a 12 core processor, the enumeration could be
0..11 or 1..12. The BIOS happened to pick the latter scheme,
and some OSes while they are booting up will say in a log line
on the screen "Why is this Core 1 ?". The Guest OS knows something
is wrong (should be 0..11), but so far, I haven't seen anything
bomb because of it.

Another bug in the past, was the checksum on something on the
SoundBlaster card was wrong, and a large number of OSes booting
in the environment would put up a snarly "checksum error" and
the sound would not work. And do you think those bastards
would just pencil in the correct 0x23 type value for it ?
Nope. This would have been a trivial one-byte change, and would have
led to sound working on a lot more Guest OSes. And that's what
I mean about "once a bug, always a bug". Nobody wants to touch
the BIOS inside virtualization software. Not in the slightest,
even to fix one stinking byte. To the staff writing the
main software, the boss tells them to treat the BIOS
component as a "Black Box", and they're not to mod it.
If I had seen any sign they fixed stuff like that,
I would have a more optimistic opinion of hosting softwares.

Paul

On 9/4/21 3:22 PM, this is what Paul wrote:
> Big Al wrote:
>> On 9/4/21 1:31 PM, this is what Bill Bradshaw wrote:
>>> I have a bootalbe USB built from https://uupdump.net/.  Has anybody run this
>>> in Virtual Box on a older computer that does not meet Microsoft's
>>> requirements?
>>>
>>> <Bill>
>>>
>>>
>> IMHO, when you run a virtualbox OS you are not running it on your PC, you're running it in a virtual machine and it has it's own hardware
>> as specified by VBOX....
>>
>> But to answer your question, I have a pc that meets the requirements and I have win 11 insider or whatever you want to call it install,
>> yet it just got upgraded to 2200.176 and now it won't go any further because the VBOX system will not support it.   It was good with the
>> first few 22000.xxx installs, just stopped after the latest update.
>>
>> I did download that uupdump.net image also.   Some good that work did.  LOL
>>
>
> I installed 22000.xxx from a Microsoft download, and it worked.
>
> But I think I've already tossed that, as it was just
> a quick test of whether the install would finish.
>
> Obviously, some features in the OS are turned off when
> you do that. VBox doesn't have a TPM that I'm aware of.
> I suppose I could have used the item in Settings to test
> for that... There's a place in there to check what kind
> of TPM you've got, and whether it is ON or not.
>
> The maturity of the UEFI implementation in VBox isn't
> all that good, so I could not properly test UEFI multiboots
> inside Vbox in the past. And I don't see any reason
> for this situation to change.
>
> When virtualization software provides a "BIOS", it is a
> skeletal structure and not a full BIOS implementation. And,
> generally speaking, whatever bugs you see in that BIOS on
> day one, are there forever and ever. The BIOS design in
> hosting software, seems to be contracted out, which means
> the "maintenance" on the work done, would likely cost a
> lot of money if done on a contract basis. Could be millions
> a year for a few lines of code improvement. You would not
> expect the people who wrote the existing UEFI or EFI, to
> rewrite it and do a better job.
>
> As an example of a BIOS bug in the past, the BIOS enumerates
> CPU cores. On a 12 core processor, the enumeration could be
> 0..11 or 1..12. The BIOS happened to pick the latter scheme,
> and some OSes while they are booting up will say in a log line
> on the screen "Why is this Core 1 ?". The Guest OS knows something
> is wrong (should be 0..11), but so far, I haven't seen anything
> bomb because of it.
>
> Another bug in the past, was the checksum on something on the
> SoundBlaster card was wrong, and a large number of OSes booting
> in the environment would put up a snarly "checksum error" and
> the sound would not work. And do you think those bastards
> would just pencil in the correct 0x23 type value for it ?
> Nope. This would have been a trivial one-byte change, and would have
> led to sound working on a lot more Guest OSes. And that's what
> I mean about "once a bug, always a bug". Nobody wants to touch
> the BIOS inside virtualization software. Not in the slightest,
> even to fix one stinking byte. To the staff writing the
> main software, the boss tells them to treat the BIOS
> component as a "Black Box", and they're not to mod it.
> If I had seen any sign they fixed stuff like that,
> I would have a more optimistic opinion of hosting softwares.
>
>    Paul
Do you see Virtualbox vs VMware any different in stuff like this?

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

Big Al wrote:

> Do you see Virtualbox vs VMware any different in stuff like this?
>

I've used VMWare once or twice, but didn't read
the user manual, so have nothing to offer to help
in any decision making. The environment seemed
a bit weird, but then they all do when you haven't
used them a lot.

Paul