Any Win9x emulator (especially for Linux)?
I tried VirtualBox, but it doesn't support fullscreen stretched over all screen.
DOSBox is good for DOS but for Win9x is too slow.
>>54670850
>emulator
Why not just use wine?
>>54670980
Well, I'll think about it but I still need some solution for Win8.
>>54670850
If you don't mind non-free software, you could try vmware
>>54671235
Any differences from VMWare Player and VMWare Workstation?
>>54671366
stick with vmware workstation
>>54670850
Qemu/kvm
Or you could load the virtual box guest additions and give the video card enough memory to have full screen
>>54670850
>I tried VirtualBox, but it doesn't support fullscreen stretched over all screen.
Sure? I think I have it running in a machine at work.
>>54670850
Try PCem out, I've never tried 9x on it but it's great for emulating AT-class systems, even has Voodoo emulation.
>>54670850
Stay with VirtualBox and connect via RDP.
>>54671687
This.
>>54671366
They have been mergerd into VMWare Workstation.Player used to be the free version, at some point (v7) they dropped support for x86 guests (which was awful) then deprecated it and made Workstation free for personal use.
>>54670850
But it does support that, or did you fall for the debian meme? That thing is only supposed to be used for server that rely on old as fuck software.
>>54671650
>>54671682
VirtualBox has no additions for DOS-based Windows.
>>54671871
But stretching doesn't rely on guest additions, it's just taking the output and litterally stretching it to the windowedge.
>>54671871
Just use rdp to connect and you can choose any resolution you want.
>>54671855
>But it does support that
What is "it"? DOSBox?
There was 0.74 version for years and I tried to install Windows 95. I couldn't.
Whatever, I downloaded a kit with Windows 95. I was disappointed by its speed.
>>54671898
>stretching it to the windowedge
Awful solution.
>>54671235
>>54671381
>>54671650
Hypervisors are not emulators.
>>54671905
DOS-based Windows systems cannot act as RDP hosts, even non-terminal server versions of NT could not until XP.
>>54673384
https://msdn.microsoft.com/de-de/library/aa728832(v=vs.71).aspx
>>54673384
>Hypervisors are not emulators
Are there any differences for casual use between hypervisors and emulators?
>>54673438
nope, their function is identical
"runs old software/OS"
unless you're autistic, of course
>>54671871
Not in 5.0 but 4.3 should work.
>>54673438
An emulator does what it says, it emulates the entire system; CPU, video controller, chipset, you name it.
Hypervisors don't do this, instead they provide the guest OS with more direct hardware access. You're running the software on your own CPU, RAM, video controller, chipset, and whatever else.
>>54673460
Hypervisors are not for legacy compatibility, they don't emulate legacy hardware to any capacity, neither are they intended to.
>>54673437
Not RDP.
>>54670850
Use PCem, not sure how well it does Win9x but I know it does 3.1 really well.
>>54673710
Damn, i mixed something up. But you should be able to install Guest Addons in VirtualBox 4.3 and use vrdp
>>54673696
Well, what kind of problems I might be able to experience using hypervisors for Win9x?
>>54673745
Emulates VX Pentium and many 486 boards, should be quite fine for 95 at the very least.
>>54673763
Maybe, I'm sure there were plenty of non-RDP remote access solutions out there for 9x hardware as well, even Mac OS had them for fuck sake.
>>54673772
I've never run 9x for any extended period of time in a hypervisor, but I don't have any doubts that you're likely to have problems with software like games that tend to be very dependent on direct hardware access.
>>54670850
PCem. I actually use the Windows version in WINE. It's demanding though, I can barely emulate a Pentium 75 with 2D accelerated video on my Athlon 860k.
>>54674037
>with 2D accelerated video on my Athlon 860k
Why would you want this?
/g/ never gives a fuck about your actual usage case requirements, they are just contrarians that tell you 'why didn't you install x'
On a similar note, is there anything better for running Win 3.1 than DOSBox? I mean DOSBox works ok but it lacks CPU idle support and turns my laptop into a toaster while Windows 3.1 is running. It's terrible, I can seriously have 3 VMWare VMs running modern OSes and it won't heat up my laptop like a single instance of DOSBox running 3.1 does.
>>54675618
Because most old games and software are 2D?
>>54675839
PCem like others have mentioned, VMware might still support 3.x too, I know the older versions I use do.
>>54675839
I recall there being some program that fixes this but I don't recall what it was.
WQGHLT.exe or DOSIDLE are probably what you are looking for under a VM
>>54675878
>Because most old games and software are 2D?
I barely remember old software and games requiring two-dimensional acceleration.
>>54671032
Win8 isn't Win9x you cunt.
>>54676050
That's why I look for Win9x emulators for Win8.
>>54676038
Windows and most 2D productivity applications would benefit from it.
