Run WIMS-D5 on Win XP: Solutions & Alternatives

  • Thread starter Thread starter libertad
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges of running the WIMS-D5 executable on Windows XP, particularly due to its compilation with an older compiler that is incompatible with XP. Participants explore potential solutions and alternatives for executing the software without access to its source code.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the WIMS-D5 executable runs on Windows 2000 and earlier operating systems but not on Windows XP, seeking a solution for compatibility.
  • Another suggests making an official request to NEA for access to the software, emphasizing the legal right to use it.
  • Some participants speculate about potential incompatibilities related to the operating system or microprocessor architecture, questioning whether the differences between 32-bit and 64-bit systems could be a factor.
  • A suggestion is made to check the compatibility mode settings in Windows XP, although the effectiveness of this approach is uncertain.
  • One participant proposes setting up a virtual machine running Windows 2000 on the Windows XP system as a workaround, assuming that the application does not require high graphical performance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on how to address the compatibility issue, with no consensus on a definitive solution. Multiple competing suggestions are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the lack of source code for recompilation, which limits options for resolving the compatibility issue. There are also uncertainties regarding the specific hardware configurations of the machines involved.

libertad
Messages
43
Reaction score
1
Hello there,
I have an exe file of WIMS-D5 code which is complied with an old compiler so it cannot be run under Windows XP. It can run on Win 2000 an other lower OS.

Is there a solution which helps me run it under Win XP?
I don't have its source code to recompile it.

Thanks
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Probably the best thing is to do an official request at NEA. I know they are a pain, but if you have the legal right to use their software, sooner or later you will obtain it.
 
I wonder if it is an incompatibility with the OS (XP) or the microprocessor (32 bit vs 64 bit, or something like that). I presume the microprocessor of the XP machine is different than for the Win2K or lower OS?

It's certainly best to compile the code on the platform with the OS under which it will be used.
 
Astronuc said:
I wonder if it is an incompatibility with the OS (XP) or the microprocessor (32 bit vs 64 bit, or something like that). I presume the microprocessor of the XP machine is different than for the Win2K or lower OS?

It's certainly best to compile the code on the platform with the OS under which it will be used.

I don't have the source code to compile it again.
 
libertad said:
I don't have the source code to compile it again.
In that case, I would recommend Vanesch's suggestion and request the source code from NEA. Or find a Win2K system.

Is the XP Machine similar to the one that had Win2K, i.e. what processor is one using as opposed to the one on which the executable was created? I assume the HD's of the XP machine use NTFS.
 
If you right click a program and go to "Properties", you can change the compatability mode (under, of course, the "Compatability" tab). I have no clue if it will work, but it's worth a try.
 
If you really need it one solution which requires some effort (and works if the application doesn't require extreme graphical performance for one) is to install a virtual win2k guest under XP and run the native win2k version of the software there ... since it's then win2k should definitely work (for example http://www.virtualbox.org/ ).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
7K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K