Agreed - Win95 has been obsolete for years, but Win98 is still good.
(Except that certain software companies are deliberately removing backward compatibility for it in their applications, and others ignore it entirely, which was what eventually drove me to upgrade to XP... grumble grumble mutter grumble. =\)
ID:186285
 Jul 28 2005, 1:44 am
|
|
|
Jul 28 2005, 12:52 pm
|
|
Nadrew
  |
Yeah, I eventually had to update to XP because a lot of stuff I was downloading would give me a 'This program only works on Windows 2000 or higher!' which drove me insane. I can't imagine how quickly Win98 would run on this machine, but I bet it would be awesome...damn shame XP is so bulky.
|
Flame Sage wrote:
What the heck did you do to the thread!? Your thread is alive and well in another part of the forum. Just this subthread was moved. :) Probably because it went off-topic, or something. | |
Jon88 wrote:
Your thread is alive and well in another part of the forum. Just this subthread was moved. :) Probably because it went off-topic, or something. Lol.. the funny thing is that where Crispy is cut off... the first word in the thread is Agreed. If somebody didn't read the original thread they'll have no idea. Hiead | |
not yet- i'm still waiting on DSL access from home. as soon as that happens, i can begin to try out the nightly builds of Wine.
| |
I'm assuming this was a complete failure, digimouse, did you ever start working on this project in the first place?
I wouldn't mind if WINE worked with BYOND perfectly. (Infact, I would be very glad!) | |
Not as much though. If I remember correctly, qEmu halfs your system's specs. So, if your running on a moderatly crap computer you can expect crap computer to run BYOND on.
| |
Crispy wrote:
Then find another solution that works better for your computer. Nadrew was just being helpful. Yeah, I know. But, I was just saying it isnt always that good of an alternative. | |
WINE actually works almost exactly the same way, emulating an operating system is never going to run as smooth as running the operating system alone.
| |
Flame Sage wrote:
I'm assuming this was a complete failure, digimouse, did you ever start working on this project in the first place? your support is comforting, and your assumtions incorrect as usual. while there is no rousing success at this point, there were some improvements since this thread was started. yes i did start working on it, as much as i can considering certain levels of stress i am under during the past year. the codeweavers team has been quite helpful early on. now that i have more free time on my hands, i will of course start working with them again by providing feedback on the nightly builds. when there is significant progress, i will definitely post about it. until then, if you would like to question my commitment, my work priority schedule, or my 'failures' then do so directly and not via the boards. | |
Actualy, I don't believe WINE works all that much like a machine emulator. It does to some degree, but it still uses the host operating system as much as possible, speeding things up sinficantly. qEmu is probably a good option of you have a spare win98 disc laying around, but not everyone does. I have never used qEmu, but I am assuming it is much like "VMWare" or "Micrsoft's Vertial Machine", except in MSVM's case, eEmu might work on something besides Windows(MSVM does work on other OSs, but it runs like crap, like they made it do that just to spite other OSs). Now, I can't prove what I am saying at this point, because I have never use qEmu, but I have used wine and WineX(which would run DM for some time without crashing). DreamMaker would run, at a good speed. Granted, I have fast machine, so I have no idea how it would work on a slower one.
| |
<font color="blue">Scoobert babbled:
Actualy, I don't believe WINE works all that much like a machine emulator. It does to some degree, but it still uses the host operating system as much as possible, speading things up sinficantly.</font> from the winehq.com website: 'Think of Wine as a compatibility layer for running Windows programs. Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely free alternative implementation of the Windows API consisting of 100% non-Microsoft code, however Wine can optionally use native Windows DLLs if they are available. Wine provides both a development toolkit for porting Windows source code to Unix as well as a program loader, allowing many unmodified Windows programs to run on x86-based Unixes, including Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris... Myth 1: "Wine is slow because it is an emulator" - Some people mean by that that Wine must emulate each processor instruction of the Windows application. This is plain wrong. As Wine's name says: "Wine Is Not an Emulator": Wine does not emulate the Intel x86 processor. It will thus not be as slow as Wabi which, since it is not running on a x86 Intel processor, also has to emulate the processor. Windows applications that do not make system calls will run just as fast as on Windows (no more no less). Some people argue that since Wine introduces an extra layer above the system a Windows application will run slowly. It is true that, in theory, Windows applications that run in Wine or are recompiled with Winelib will not be able to achieve the same performance as native Unix applications. But that's theory. In practice you will find that a well written Windows application can beat a badly written Unix application at any time. The efficiency of the algorithms used by the application will have a greater impact on its performance than Wine.' <font color="blue">qEmu is probably a good option of you have a spare win98 disc laying around, but not everyone does. I have never used qEmu, but I am assuming it is much like "VMWare" or "Micrsoft's Virtual Machine"...</font> that, for the most part, is true. i use Qemu for running BYOND as I wait for some feedback from the CodeWeavers crew (they are doing the challenge to get as many windows programs to run under Wine, and I submitted BYOND about a month or so ago... just got back in touch with them this week- we shall see what progress has been made, and i'll babble about it here later). on my P4 2.8Ghz laptop, BYOND on Qemu (running Win98 SE), runs about like a 100Mhz machine - slow , but for programs like Chat or Chatters it is more than useable. Last Robot Standing works pretty good, with just a little bit of delay. i have not tried the Qemu accelerator yet, but i hear it improves performance significantly once it is compiled into Qemu. | |
Wrong, but since Digi has already gone in deapth I wont. That's a life saver for all, my in deapth talks are always confusing for all.
| |