Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

joe · Sep 5, 2006, 11:52 AM

I'm trying to decide between using Boot Camp or Parallels for my XP installation. I own a Black MacBook (2GHz, 1GB RAM) and plan to use XP to run some apps that I need for work. Eventually I'm going to buy a Mac Pro Tower (when finances permit) and transfer XP over to the faster machine. Is there an advantage to using Parallels in this case? Or will XP attach itself to the serial number of my MacBook regardless?

seanc · Sep 5, 2006, 01:07 PM

XP will attatch itself like a leech. If you buy OEM XP I think you're screwed, if you buy retail you should have no trouble installing it on the other pc assuming that it is and you say it is installed on ONE computer if you have to ring them (unless you have a volume license).

craigb6 · Sep 5, 2006, 02:25 PM

I think it is possible to do with Parallels. The file which XP thinks is a drive could be dragged across to your new Mac Pro (once Parallels release a Mac Pro compatible version) - at least this is what I remember reading on the Parallels forum. Like seanc says my understanding is that if you buy an OEM verson you can only install it on one computer, so if you do this on the MacBook through Bootcamp you cannot transfer it across, you need to buy another licence. I'm not so sure about the legal implications of using Parallels, but it should be a drag and drop although it may not be legal.

seanc · Sep 5, 2006, 02:34 PM

Doesn't Parallels still see the hardware? XP binds itself to the serial numbers of random pieces of hardware. E.g HDD, Motherboard etc

joe · Sep 6, 2006, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by craigb6

Like seanc says my understanding is that if you buy an OEM verson you can only install it on one computer, so if you do this on the MacBook through Bootcamp you cannot transfer it across, you need to buy another licence.

I didn't realize the OEM version had that limitation. If so, it didn't affect my previous VPC (Virtual PC) setup. However, I probably should have given a bit more information when I started this thread.

At my previous job I purchased VPC (M$ version) with XP Pro, Win98 (OEM), and Win2K (OEM) for use on a PowerBook. I'm not certain if that version of XP was OEM or not - tho it probably was since it was included with VPC. I later upgraded to a faster PowerBook and VPC made the transition painless. ALL versions of 'doze transferred to the new PowerBook along with VPC without a problem (tho that was also the case for all other apps too). Things have changed in the last year or so since I left that job (MGA??). In hindsight I wish I had started this thread before I purchased XP Pro. But it didn't occur to me that XP would get locked to my MacBook and unable to transfer to a newer Mac when I upgraded.

At least I didn't break the seal on the XP package yet.

I'm not so sure about the legal implications of using Parallels, but it should be a drag and drop although it may not be legal.

I don't think I'm posting about something illegal. While M$ recently announced that VPC was discontinued, I sincerely doubt it was because owners had the ability to upgrade to a faster Mac. Or to look at this from a different perspective - If I couldn't run my apps on a newer Mac, I'd have to have kept my 1st Mac around (400Mhz iMacDV) just to run Quake3. That doesn't seem likely.

From the previous posts I gather XP will get locked to my MacBook if I use Boot Camp. Personally I'd rather it got locked to an app/VM in the same manner as VPC. WIll Parallels do this?

ghporter · Sep 6, 2006, 07:51 AM

Not all OEM versions of XP have limitations. For example, some versions labeled "for Dell only" will ONLY work on Dell hardware. But others are just not packaged with the fancy box and all, though the disc is effectively identical to what you get in a Microsoft retail box. It depends.

The real issue is whether or not XP's activation system sees the Parallels virtual machine or the real machine, and whether or not it really activates under Parallels. Setting up dual booting WILL allow the activation system to run, so if you boot XP through Boot Camp, you WILL need a new copy for your Mac Pro.

joe · Sep 8, 2006, 12:09 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

The real issue is whether or not XP's activation system sees the Parallels virtual machine or the real machine...

Exactly! I'd prefer it sees the VM like VPC did instead of the real machine. Does anyone know the answer to this?

torifile · Sep 8, 2006, 12:47 AM

I haven't had a problem with my XP install working on my iMac and the same one on my MacBook. I don't use them at the same time, so I'm not violating any reasonable use of the software. All I did was copy my drive image over to my MacBook.

Macola · Sep 8, 2006, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by torifile

I haven't had a problem with my XP install working on my iMac and the same one on my MacBook. I don't use them at the same time, so I'm not violating any reasonable use of the software. All I did was copy my drive image over to my MacBook.

Was the original install an OEM copy or retail?

Macola · Sep 8, 2006, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by joe

Exactly! I'd prefer it sees the VM like VPC did instead of the real machine. Does anyone know the answer to this?

I'm pretty sure it sees the VM, though I have no proof. I had to reactivate my copy of (OEM) XP after installing in Parallels (I originally used it for a Boot Camp install). Also, since everything else in XP only sees the VM, it seeems reasonable that the activation system would also.

torifile · Sep 9, 2006, 12:12 AM

Originally Posted by Macola

Was the original install an OEM copy or retail?

It was a site license copy. That may have had something to do with it, I dunno.

ghporter · Sep 9, 2006, 09:05 AM

Most site licenses skip the authentication altogether. Very handy...

bluedog · Feb 19, 2007, 10:34 AM

I've successfully moved my XP virtual machine from my 24" iMac to my Macbook and XP didn't know the difference. If you were trying to use BootCamp then I guess it would need relicensing to the new hardware.

Since Parallels creates the virtual connection to your hardware, if you don't tweak its settings (add more ram to the virtual machine, etc), you should be good to move your license over.

Legality aside, you should remove the copy on the initial computer to remain within the licensing compliance for XP. I'm not even sure if doing this is truly within the agreement (as I have not studied the license text).

ghporter · Feb 19, 2007, 11:43 AM

For what it's worth, I do not believe that there's any mention of a virtual machine in the standard EULA for XP. Since installing it in Parallels isn't really installing it "on hardware," that may be a legitimate distinction. Me? I'm running Parallels (build 3170) using my Boot Camp image. So far, so good.