Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Operating System....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    (Edit: Double post. Doh.)
    Last edited by Xentax; October 23, 2002, 11:01.
    Xentax@nc.rr.com

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by vmxa1
      I can not say for sure, but the kernel is basically the same, the issues is about direct x support. Anyway, why go to 2000 instead of XP? 2000 is a dead system.
      Win2k is one of the listed supported systems, and as Rantz said, that's the OS the devs are using.

      And I disagree that Win2k is dead. It may be the home install option of choice by now (Since anything is better than WinME, and JoeAverageUser seems to think Win2k is too WinNT for his taste), but our office is still using 2k (we finally got the last guy off of NT4 only a few weeks ago...).

      XP is still going through growing pains -- I've seen a lot more XP machines with flaky problems -- driver issues, lack of support for some hardware, etc., than 2k machines. Driver issues are hardly an unusual thing, but when NO drivers work correctly, not even the newest available, there's a problem.

      So, I'm sticking to Win2k for awhile yet.
      Xentax@nc.rr.com

      Comment


      • #48
        Since you have been to the Moo/Moo2 boards you have probably seen the post that pop up from time to time about not being able to get the games to work on W2K. On have seen the same complain for many games on others boards. W2K does not have a robust Direct abc support and will not be enhanced, there for it is a dead system. They would only fix a seriously damaged issues on it, that is the definitionof dead end. XP will be enhanced to handle new tools as they emirge, such as Direct X 9. I have scores of games from ancient DOS to Warcraft III and all work on my XP box, that would not be true on W2K systems that I have tried. If people have a preference, so be it, but really to install W2K over XP at this point in time is not the best choice, even to save money. Reminds me of when Win95 with patch B was out and people were still installing DOS 6.22 instead.

        Comment


        • #49
          By the way if you already have W2K, that is not the same as moving to it from say Win98 or ME. Although I can not imagine why anyone would still be on ME, I dumped the week I got it.

          Comment


          • #50
            personally, I haven't had any problems running MOO1, 2, MoM, Doom 1, Warcraft 2, or any other Dos based game under Win2K.

            Of course, I haven't tried the *really* old school stuff, of pre-'94, so that may be problematic. All of us that have tried XP at the office have run screaming from it. Matter of personal preference I suppose.
            Rantz Hoseley
            Art Director
            Quicksilver Software, Inc.

            Comment


            • #51
              I've been able to run all my old DOS games on 2000. I believe the only problem I had was with MOM and all I had to do was fiddle with some of the parameters for launching it. Besides, I think Microsoft is bluffing about not supporting W2K. Imagine the PR nightmare that would ensue if G'ma Pennypincher was told she couldn't access her egreeting cards until she upgraded to XP.

              Comment

              Working...
              X