Seriously: WILL CIV IV run in Win2000?

[dearmad]

Can ANY beta tester speak to this. I do NOT want to go to winxp for this. I do NOT want to have to call Uncle BILL whenever I install my OS. I relaly like win2000 a lot

-a guy who's last pirated OS was DOS 6.2!

[Sava]

Why do people stay with old and obsolete OS's? (not trying to bash anyone... a serious question)

WinXP is basically what everything is being designed for. Aside from that, it's the best version of Windows out there.

I try to install the latest version of Windows every year or so. I keep my important files backed up. But it's always refreshing to have a clean installed OS.

btw, i haven't paid for an OS... ever...

the only legit copy of an OS I have had is when I bought PC's with an OS loaded on it... a Gateway in 1998... Dell in 2000 or so...

[Solver]

Sava, don't you think you might have answered your own question ? I think many people stay on the older OSs because they don't warez them and actually don't have the money to spare for a new OS .

[ml_4da3]

Just pirate it.. This way you wont reward bill for his lousy product.

[nbarclay]

If it weren't for Microsoft's product activation garbage, I would have moved to Windows XP a lot sooner. A book publisher can't control where I read a book, so why should a software company be able to tell me what computer I can and can't run a piece of software on as long as I'm not using it on more than one at a time?

[petermarkab]

I reckon we should all boycott civ 4 until it supports win 98 se, 2000 (non XP versions in other words), that is if it doesn't support them out of the box.

Hmm, not likely!

regards,
Peter

[Sava]

Originally posted by nbarclay
If it weren't for Microsoft's product activation garbage, I would have moved to Windows XP a lot sooner. A book publisher can't control where I read a book, so why should a software company be able to tell me what computer I can and can't run a piece of software on as long as I'm not using it on more than one at a time?

I totally agree.

The evil stuff Microsoft does with it's products for people who actually buy it makes me not feel guilty about pirating it.

Not that I'd actually feel guilty anyways... but still...

[dearmad]

WTF people!? It's OK to pirate an OS but not a GAME!?

Ugh, you are all just too much. In a word, you suck. AS an artist and someone who does NOT pirate ANYTHING (once I grew up and got a clue about it at 19 yrs old), please, don't lecture me about using an old OS when you're a stinking PIRATE!

[nbarclay]

I remember reading system requirements somewhere, and those requirements (assuming they were accurate) allowed for either Win2K or XP. For those who aren't familiar with the history of Windows and may be wondering why Win98 and WinME aren't supported (if what I read is accurate), I'll give a bit of background that probably explains it (assuming the issue isn't just a matter of Microsoft dictating what versions companies are allowed to advertise support for).

Windows 95, 98, and ME are descended from old DOS-based technology, with Windows slapped on top of a MS-DOS platform and support for 32-bit programs added on. Beginning with Windows 95, DOS was no longer a separate product from Windows, but the fact that Windows had been developed to run on top of DOS still held the design back.

Somewhere along the line, Microsoft had designed a different version of Windows, Windows NT, aimed probably most directly at competing with Unix in the server market. That was a much more robust and serious operating system than the DOS-based versions of Windows, but it wasn't compatible with everything from the world of DOS-based Windows. Windows 2000 was originally slated to be Windows NT 5.0, and is part of the NT family.

With Windows XP, Microsoft migrated its mainline desktop product from the old DOS-based technology to the newer NT-based technology. So if developers want to take advantage of the goodies that NT-based operating systems have available but DOS-based versions of Windows don't, they can't have backward compatibility to Windows 98 and ME (or at least can't have it without a loss of functionality). In contrast, because both Win2K and WinXP are NT-based, backward compatibility from WinXP to Win2K is a lot easier to achieve.

[Solver]

You know, that's fair and everything, but the truth is, many applications that "only" work on 2k/XP just typically use one or two API functions from these systems - and someone releases a very minor tweak that makes them run on older systems.

[Blake]

Irionically it's mostly the very old games (like VESA) games that run on WinXP but not Win2K, because Win2K lacks certain compatibility options. But modern DirectX games don't use ancient obscure technologies so Win2K works just fine to run them.

[ml_4da3]

Please dont go there, dearmad.. ..I cannot resist replying..

Sharing information is a basic human characteristica - we love information and we love helping others.

Piracy is just a natural extension of what kind of species we are; if person A has information and the means to duplicate this information, and person B is in need of this information, it is only natural that A copy information to B. Information can be stories by the campfire, operating system, politics, news or whatever. In my opinion, this a basic human right.

The "creator" does not lose anything on copying, he/she stil has the original and can sell copies he/she makes. A lost hypothetical sale is not loss of money.

Piracy is not stealing, thats just ridiculus propaganda. Stealing implies that someone loses somethig, like a physical cd-record. The idea of ownership of "patterns" is stupid. Free sharing of information is beneficial, maybe not for some egotistical artists; but for humankind at large; especially over a longer period of time..

And still, after all is said and done. I have a budget, I spend a lot of money on culture, such as the upcoming civilization IV game (or all the earlier civ games). No matter what, I cannot put more money on culture than I already do today; piracy does not make me put *less* money on culture; but *more*. Piracy does not need to result in lower incomes for artists; and harder copyrightlaws need not result in higher incomes for artists. Many anti-pirates does simply not realise this - there is just so much money out there.

[dearmad]

The above is OK to post in here?

And don't tell me where not to go. I've made a living selling "patterns" in writing and photography before. Get a clue.

I can't believe how selfish you people are in your pitiful attempts to legitimize small behavior.

It was MY life and MY time and MY experience and MY effort that went into those patterns. NONE of those resources is something I will ever have again! It is NOT YOUR right to take it and barter with it and use it freely and at will.

Leech.

[Disk Killer]

It's an absolute truth that if I had not received, shall we say, underground copies of SimCity and Civilization when I was a kid, I would never have shelled out hundreds of dollars on their sequels once I had a job.

This is why knee-jerk reactions do no one any good.

[dearmad]

Originally posted by Disk Killer
It's an absolute truth that if I had not received, shall we say, underground copies of SimCity and Civilization when I was a kid, I would never have shelled out hundreds of dollars on their sequels once I had a job.

This is why knee-jerk reactions do no one any good.

How on earth are you characterizing my disgust with your (and other pirate) attitudes as knee jerk? I LIVED through what it is to make a living by selling creative property. IMO your "absolute truth" is irrelevent as you have no way to prove it, just an assertion, no facts.

My facts were my bank aco****, my clients, my publisher, my editor, et. al.