Re: Does anyone else feel
If it works, why not?
I still know places that have actual DOS machines (not even virtualised, though they could be as they only really communicate with serial and network interfaces). If it works and does everything you want and isn't a liability, that's good. In fact, I'd say it's probably safer to have something in a virtualised instance rather than forgotten about, exposed to the network, and instead put in an even more locked-down environment than it had ever been deployed physically (i.e. virtual networking on the same machine preventing exposure of inter-machine communication to the network).
Certainly the deployments I've done so far of Server 2012 and Windows 8, I've kept in a VM while I'm testing to ensure a) I don't break my existing network and domains by playing with the settings and b) the settings from the network don't interfere with my tests. I see no reason why things like public-access kiosks, internal processes and obsolete software that can't be replaced can't just run in a VM. Hell, if anything, it guarantees you against a Microsoft "cull" of products. Who cares if the OS in the VM isn't supported or updated so long as it's not acting on untrusted data or connected direct to the network - the easiest way of which is to virtualise the machine and then put a REAL machine around it to sanitise access to it with up-to-date security (and on the OS of your choice).
I also personally hate anything that tries to lock itself to a particular machine. The damn door-control software I have does it for a start, not to mention boiler-control software for a huge, proprietary, £100,000-a-shot boiler. Who cares about the £40 bit of software that can only control that brand of boiler anyway, especially if it needs reinstalling and reactivating every time the old machines in the boiler room go a bit funny. Virtualise it (to be honest, if you do it right, the installers would NEVER know the difference from a real machine!), then - within the bounds of your EULA of course - re-deploy and shift the base hardware as much as you like.
Though I'm still reluctant to work inside a virtual environment ALL the time on a desktop, I think that's just my old-fashioned side coming through. The amount of things that can benefit from being virtualised is humongous. Hell, we've even been virtualising our old games for years - we call them emulators.
My girlfriend works in a genetics lab in a hospital. It's taken the IT guy there five days to rebuild the old custom interface running on DOS that runs a million pounds worth of microscope. Sure, the manufacturer has more up-to-date software... for a price. But the old stuff does EVERYTHING you ever need to do already, and the attached bog-standard PC dies and is replaced all the time because of the amount of work done on it. The microscope's still going, the software is still licensed. Virtualise it and never have to pay the license fee even if someone stops making PC's with that interface - so long as you can get an adaptor and convince the virtual machine that it's direct hardware, it's all to your benefit at much, much, much less cost. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the manufacturer update was their old DOS software running in a licensed VM that you can't see.