Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: karajorma on October 25, 2003, 01:46:33 pm
-
Well this came a something of a big suprise. Apparently a bunch of Mac programmers have succeeding in porting the original FS2 source over to OS X. Apparently it's still in beta but mac gamers have been playing it for months. :eek: They've even being using GE's FS1 port so that they can play FS1 as well from what I can gather.
First I heard of this was a post on the VWBB (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,6507.msg106755.html#msg106755)
I've posted over on one of the mac forums inviting them to feel free to register on HLP and VWBB.
I'm wondering if the programmers doing this will be able to get anything out of the SCP (especially the Linux port).
-
Whoa.
Now we gotta wait for the download page to be fixed.
I don't think they've got the SCP enhancements; we'll have to see.
-
-
-
There was an FS1 on Amiga or something.... details are very fuzzy, but there was a port to something other than Pc that i remember.
-
of course, now, ebay sales are going to go like crazy, as mac users strive to add to their small collection of games.
-
-
-
Macs don't suck, they're just...odd.
What I really want to know is how you play FS 1 or 2 with one button on the mouse.
-
*snip*
Originally posted by Hippo
Say it with me... MAC BITES!
-
Originally posted by Hippo
Say it with me... MAC SUCKS!
First thing i thought when i read the topic.
-
Repeat after me: Nothing that can play Freespace sucks
:p
-
-
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
There was an FS1 on Amiga or something.... details are very fuzzy, but there was a port to something other than Pc that i remember.
FS1 was ported to the Amiga. I remember hearing about it before I actually got FS2 and got into the FS community.
If you want to take a look click here (http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/_amiga/freespace_game.html) but unsuprisingly the screenshots won't look much different :D
-
Originally posted by karajorma
FS1 was ported to the Amiga. I remember hearing about it before I actually got FS2 and got into the FS community.
If you want to take a look click here (http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/_amiga/freespace_game.html) but unsuprisingly the screenshots won't look much different :D
heh... one of the guys in the porting team is a swede. if I only had an amiga, I'd ask him about the port...
-
Hippo : Give the anti mac sentiment a rest. You've made your point but I'd rather see them here playing Mindgames and contributing to the community then send them off to Coventry just for not thinking that Windows is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
-
thats because windows is the greatest thing since the panama canal :nervous:
however, it is rather interesting that a mac port is actually working. i think the guy is registered here or something
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Macs don't suck, they're just...odd.
What I really want to know is how you play FS 1 or 2 with one button on the mouse.
And they're pretty overpriced, IMO anyway. That's all I'm going to say about that.
I only have used one button (even though my mice have 2).
-
so, there's a whole other FS community we haven't heard of?
-
Originally posted by Hippo
Say it with me... MAC SUCKS!
:lol:
-
Originally posted by Liberator
What I really want to know is how you play FS 1 or 2 with one button on the mouse.
.
.
.
:wtf:
.
.
.
Ever heard of a joystick before?
-
Thought so. Full of bias.
I own both a Mac and a PC, and I still think OS X is much better than XP. I use my PC for playing games more, because it's much better at doing it than my Mac. To be honest the only reason I didn't get a Windows laptop rather than a Mac one was because Mac has its share of high quality games too, which aren't available on any other platform. Not as many as Windows, but I don't mind. Besides, Macs get almost every worthwhile Windows game ported anyway. I'm not really biased either way towards Mac or Windows.
Originally posted by Liberator
What I really want to know is how you play FS 1 or 2 with one button on the mouse.
Ever heard of not using Apple's crappy one button mice and getting a decent one instead?
-
I've posted over on one of the mac forums inviting them to feel free to register on HLP and VWBB.
Say it with me... MAC SUCKS!
:doubt:
-
Originally posted by Hippo
Say it with me... MAC SUCKS!
is that a value judgement?...
Say it with me: To each thier own
-
os x is very seksi. and it's great that there are people playing fs2 on the mac, too.
-
If Mac sucks, Windoze sucks even more. Doesn't stop me using it, though. The advantage of Windoze is that almost every PC game has a Windoze version, but Mac and Linux versions are rarer.
I think that Microsoft should produce a single-tasking version of Windoze. Just the underlying subsystem and drivers. It would be used for playing games, because if you're in the middle of a game you don't need the multitasking capability. The Wine program for Linux is similar to this: Linux single-tasks, so it's more stable, and Wine lets you run many (er, some?) Windoze programs, but Wine can't provide DirectX functionality to the level required by most games. So hows about a cut-down version of XP that doesn't waste 20% of the CPU's processing time multitasking, and instead funnels it all into framerate?
-
Originally posted by Turnsky
Say it with me: To each thier own
Well said, I like to think of these things like cars. Each has thier purpose. Business' use run of the mill Ford Escorts, power gamers use suped up Suberu Imprezas or something and so on. Each has their place in the world and while one group may look down on the other - you have to realise that you simply do not have the need.
I think it makes sense :p
-
Originally posted by Ransom Arceihn
Thought so. Full of bias.
I own both a Mac and a PC, and I still think OS X is much better than XP. I use my PC for playing games more, because it's much better at doing it than my Mac. To be honest the only reason I didn't get a Windows laptop rather than a Mac one was because Mac has its share of high quality games too, which aren't available on any other platform. Not as many as Windows, but I don't mind. Besides, Macs get almost every worthwhile Windows game ported anyway. I'm not really biased either way towards Mac or Windows.
Not all of us Ransom. Don't judge the entire community by some fools who'd turn people away for daring to use a different operating system.
As I said before every single person who comes to HLP and stays is one more potential player of my own campaigns. The more numbers we have here the better for everyone concerned. I personally welcome any mac users who want to join the community. As for the rest of you am I really the first to notice that Ransom needs the welcome beam shot at him?
:welcome:
Hippo : I really hope I'm not going to see the same stupid attitude if any Amiga users show up too. Cause if they do and you do insult their machines you are far more stupid than I had given you credit for.
-
I think that Microsoft should produce a single-tasking version of Windoze. Just the underlying subsystem and drivers. It would be used for playing games, because if you're in the middle of a game you don't need the multitasking capability.
Enter XBox.....
I own both a Mac and a PC, and I still think OS X is much better than XP
I do agree about that, but OSX is available for macs only. Remember, apple only has a 3% market share.
-
Problem with XBox is, it doesn't run existing Windoze games without some effort being put into porting them. Plus, it crashes.
-
I don't like Macs, but mainly because of the software availability issue. That and the fact that "backwards compatability" is a term apparently lost upon Apple's software engineers, as evidenced by OSX's Classic Mode (dual boot into OS9), make them extremely frustrating to work with. And you think Windows is unpredictable... I've had three Mac's with identical hardware respond in completely different ways to a full drive image.
I also spent last summer in a support position at a local college... PC's are so much easier to manage on a network.
-
Originally posted by Kosh
Remember, apple only has a 3% market share.
7%, actually, and growing.
And OSX is built on Unix, don't you know. It's as stable as a rock, the interface is gorgeous, the applications are beautiful, reliable and functional, and the computers themselves are works of art.
What has Microsoft done for you recently? Bug fixes and patching security holes?
In the last year Apple has released the G5 (world's fastest personal computer), a new line of iPods, the world's smallest and largest laptops, the iTunes music store, iTunes for windows, and their new operating system. The software updates they publish are adding more features, not fixing bugs, because there are no bugs. Macs work easily with any hardware you plug into them (so you can use your Microsoft five-button USB optical mouse with no problems) and they can transfer files made on a PC seamlessly.
You really need someone to show you the OS to appreciate its beauty, though. But enough from me... is there a link to the Beta port yet?
-
-
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Well said, I like to think of these things like cars. Each has thier purpose. Business' use run of the mill Ford Escorts, power gamers use suped up Suberu Imprezas or something and so on. Each has their place in the world and while one group may look down on the other - you have to realise that you simply do not have the need.
I think it makes sense :p
true... and hippo... you tell that to the people who have used a mac... i for one never used them..
-
Originally posted by Galemp
What has Microsoft done for you recently? Bug fixes and patching security holes?
actually, i havnt had any problems with XP (besides what i do to it, which i promply fix)
but whats funny(all of thist story is true), my freind has a G4 or sumthin (it was new, thats all i know) with OS X
so i was gonna check some of the forums i usually look at, so i fire up the Mac version of IE and poof! the mac stops responding! Just like a windows freeze.
so my freind trys to do a forced shutdown; to make it short, we had to go around and unplug it to get it working again.
all cuz i clicked on the IE icon!
-
Originally posted by Hippo
I'm not trying to say Macs are the worst thing you could buy and will burn down your house. I lived with 3 Macs for 5 years. I'm not saying that they aren't a decent company. I am simply saying that PCs are still quite better then Macs, since I havent seen any evidence otherwise. If you're going to whine and try to prove me wrng and that Macs are as good or better then PCs, thats fine, thats your opinion. But I still have mine.
This is exactly what happened on the VBB before it was shut down. One person says one thing that they truly belive, and they are ripped to shreds because someone else thinks differently.
I've heard enough.
Hippo. There is a large difference between what you say above and your earlier postings. I don't mind you having a difference of opinion from me but I do expect you to show some tact.
I mentioned in the first post on this thread that I'd told all the freespace fans on that mac forum that they were welcome to come over here and register. If you'd thought a little before posting you might have realised that one of the first threads any mac user is going to click on will be this one. How welcome do you think most of them are going to feel when someone is making trollish comments like your earlier ones?
Funny you should mention the VBB cause one of the other big problems with it was that it didn't make newbies feel very welcome.
As far as I'm concerned any fan of Freespace should be made to feel welcome here. I'd rather that those people were happy to post here and felt that they could contribute to the community. Porting the FS2 code to OS X is quite an acheivement and there are a lot of talented people who use macs. I'd rather see these people contributing to the wider FS community than sitting around on mac boards and not working on mods because there isn't a wide enough audience for them.
-
Originally posted by Galemp
7%, actually, and growing.
And OSX is built on Unix, don't you know. It's as stable as a rock, the interface is gorgeous, the applications are beautiful, reliable and functional, and the computers themselves are works of art.
What has Microsoft done for you recently?
Released Windows XP, which is l33t.
Incidently, the G5 is not the worlds fastest personal computer. The benchmarks were rigged in macs favour.
-
Originally posted by Galemp
And OSX is built on Unix, don't you know. It's as stable as a rock,
i can say the same thing.
Windows is based on DOS. DOS = 0wnage (i dont really need to go into specifics for that one. :rolleyes: )
But what their based on dosnt make them good or bad (so to speak) . See my above post. If a Mac can freeze when i try and run IE, there is definitly a problem.
-
Any multitasking system is based around some form of memory manager. This means that programs have to use an inordinate number of pointers to keep track of data that is being shifted around in memory. When dealing with pointers, one null in the wrong place causes a General Protection Fault. Hence, any reasonably-complex program written for a multitasking operating system is likely to crash occasionally. These software companies don't have the time or money to hunt down every last bug (although Microsoft certainly has the money...)
EVERY multitasking operating system has problems with crashes.
I have to admit that XP is the best Windows yet, because the OS itself has never crashed on my machine (it tends to reboot just after I log in when I boot it up from cold in the mornings, but that's coz I installed a new motherboard without reinstalling Windows, and it's confused about drivers). A lot of programs running on top of XP HAVE crashed, though. So it isn't necessarily the operating system's fault. If one crashing program brings them all down: that's the operating system's fault (see Win95, Win97, Win98, WinME and all 16-bit versions of Windows).
I'll also admit that Macs are far more stable than Windows PCs. I don't know why this is, but it probably has something to do with Microsoft's method of 'improving' Windows, which most likely involves putting a bunch of green programmers on the task without any information on what the existing code actually does. Same principle as most bloatware, really; the old, redundant code is left in because no one knows if it's essential or not and the project deadline is too close to allow experimentation...
-
Originally posted by Carl
so, there's a whole other FS community we haven't heard of?
Now that's what I'm really wondering about.
Hmmm, here's something.
http://www.icculus.org/freespace2/
-
Is this a different Linux port from the one mentioned in the SCP forum? If so we really ought to get these guys over here.
-
now we know about icculus, the SCP has been working sort of with them, though there project is more dedicated to converting the origonal at the cost of windows compatability
-
Originally posted by Descenterace
Problem with XBox is, it doesn't run existing Windoze games without some effort being put into porting them. Plus, it crashes.
The XBox crashes? I thought consoles never crashed unless something was wrong with your game media. Then again, it IS a Microsoft product...:p
In the last year Apple has released the G5 (world's fastest personal computer),
That's just utter bull****. Apple rigged the benchmarks. The better Athlon XPs leave the G5 in their dust.
-
I actually don't really see the merit in being the fastestest. as long as it's fast enough, all is well.
-
From http://www.icculus.org/~ravage/freespace2/
If you choose to install movies, they will play but you will not get sound.
:eek2: They coded an MVE player? :eek2:
-
Originally posted by kode
I actually don't really see the merit in being the fastestest. as long as it's fast enough, all is well.
Ever heard of "one-upmanship"?;)
-
Originally posted by Goober5000
:eek2: They coded an MVE player? :eek2:
... probably ripped the code from the descent manager mveextract tool...
-
Originally posted by Woolie Wool
Ever heard of "one-upmanship"?;)
no, can't say I have.
-
Originally posted by Descenterace
If Mac sucks, Windoze sucks even more. Doesn't stop me using it, though. The advantage of Windoze is that almost every PC game has a Windoze version, but Mac and Linux versions are rarer.
I think that Microsoft should produce a single-tasking version of Windoze. Just the underlying subsystem and drivers. It would be used for playing games, because if you're in the middle of a game you don't need the multitasking capability. The Wine program for Linux is similar to this: Linux single-tasks, so it's more stable, and Wine lets you run many (er, some?) Windoze programs, but Wine can't provide DirectX functionality to the level required by most games. So hows about a cut-down version of XP that doesn't waste 20% of the CPU's processing time multitasking, and instead funnels it all into framerate?
Actualy it is not multitasking itself that takes most of the CPU power - it is the ammount of programs you're simultaniously running.
The problem is that even the games you use today use multiple programs during their operation - the reason why you don't see them is that the API hides them.
Even windows runnign alone had several tasks running simultaniously.
So multitasking is a must have....
Efficient management of doing so is quite another thing.
Someone please tell me, how come MS could have prorammed CD-ROM handling in such a dumbass manner, that a perpiphery that has delay in ms (in secs actually when early accesing a CD) has precedence over any other application or other source of input!
Is this a bug solvable in registry ('cause some pure installs don't seem to be doing it) or new CD drives are too fast to notice it (I mean clean ones, that don't have trouble recognising a CD)? ...or did our burned CDs deteoriate so far....I doubt since it does with even ordinary pressed CDs too.
So there is much to be optimised about the issue, however NT based multitask management is one of the few good advancements that have taken place since the start of our MS Windows calvaria.
-
Its amazing how many people seem to have a bad rep with WinXP. I have had it crash once so badly that I had to reset the system, that was Jedi Knight academy which is a souped up Quake3 engine that requires obscene amounts of power to make it run well.
I have three comps with winXP and all work fine with minimal problems... mostly due to my brother pissing around.
The G5 was the most powerful home computer... Now with AMD`s 64 bit Athlon64FX the PC is again. (having seen some reviews, me getting soon, drool.)
But really, Mac is really a minor platform that hangs on by being useful to a small number of people (newspapers, mags ect). I know of no one that willingly has a mac as a home comp, sorry.
But anything that increases FS`s fanbalse is a push to get the licence mess sorted so a company may buy in to asuch a fan base. Fs2MAC is a welcome port...
-
The guys at Red vs. Blue made a pretty funny short movie about the availability of games on Mac. ;)
http://www.redvsblue.com/appleswitch.shtml
Anyway, I posted at the IMG forum where dev of the Mac version seems to be announced, but the forum's down right now.
-
The XBox crashes? I thought consoles never crashed unless something was wrong with your game media. Then again, it IS a Microsoft product...
Some of the beta units did crash. All retail units do not crash except for game related issues; that is a problem across all three platforms.
Games can cause the PS2, GC AND the XBox to crash, but that isn't the fault of the console.
-
Xbox is the only console I've ever see crash, untill the console's OS is an a rewriteable drive of some sort as well as the game media it'self, I'm sticking with my PC
-
my n64 crashed all the time :D
ofc it probly had somthin to do with the nonstop 17 straight hours of play we put it through regularly :)
-
ok - MACS ARE NOT EVIL, anymore *gasp - i just said that!*
Mac hardware is kinda trashy, they overhype their products (But who doesn't!) the largest problem with their system is the hardware is proprietary.
However, their operating system is a dream come true - it is proof that you can have a unix for the masses, something I have been hoping for with linux for a long time.
Since OSX is a Unix, and Linux is a Unix - and porting FS2 to linux is really porting to Unix - then almost automagically there was an FS2 to OSX the moment we ported to linux -- Infact from their errata it looks like they are using our linux build to base off of (for which they should credit us otherwise they're violating IP law[/i])
-
I've never seen a PS2 or a Gamecube crash, but I saw an XBox crash four times in ten minutes. It was some time after the console was released, so I doubt the machine was a beta in this case. I don't think this particular incident had anything to do with instabilities in the console, though.
Eventually, they realised that because the console was buried inside a plastic point-of-sale display (to prevent theft), it was probably getting too hot... so they took it out and it worked OK.
I never knew consoles were so sensitive to heat.
Regarding multitasking:
Because multitasking works by allocating timeslices to different processes, the operating system has to spend some time determining which process should get the next timeslice. Depending on the efficiency of the algorithm, this can use between 5 and 20 percent of CPU time...
I am actually quite amazed at how many seperate processes some games use in an attempt to 'speed things up'! Parallel processing is possible with the P4 and Athlon series of processors, but the OS still has to manage things which slows everything down.
Didn't FS2 only use a single process?
And Descent 4 will only use a single process because I took one look at multithreaded programs and thought: how the hell do you debug one of them? Besides, multithreaded programming is not advisable for games.
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
Xbox is the only console I've ever see crash, untill the console's OS is an a rewriteable drive of some sort as well as the game media it'self, I'm sticking with my PC
Well, that's called progress. :D
-
I know of no one that willingly has a mac as a home comp, sorry.
You do now.
-
hmmm, so were getting macers now?
:)
-
but there is still one question that continues to burn in the back of my mind....
WHY IN THE F**K DO YOU STILL USE 1 BUTTON MICE!!!!
-
Not all of them do. It's like asking PC people why they all use Outlook Express.
-
Macs kick your ass for graphics, anything you can do on a PC you can do twice as fast on a Mac, and you can just get a new 2 button mouse, its not that hard.
-
Sheepy: "Macs kick your ass for graphics" is a commonly perpetuated myth
infact the best image editing/graphical rendering/etc programs are Windows and *nix x86 native
-
Especially if you have a high-end Radeon or GeForce FX card (FX5800s are not to be mentioned...)
-
From the other thread:
Apple Computer = Um, Repel a Top PC
-
What do you mean "repel a top PC"? You make no sense.
-
It's an anagram. :rolleyes: Pay more attention to the goings-on of HLP, Woolie.
-
Drew, can't you accept it? It's different, for goodness' sake.
Originally posted by Bobboau
hmmm, so were getting macers now?
:)
Me hopes so. :)
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Drew, can't you accept it? It's different, for goodness' sake.
as long as they dont go around insulting my intelligence just cuz i use a PC. thats the really problem iv had with mac'ers, they like to brag about how they G5s are the fastest computers on the planet and stuff and then rub it in your face cuz your llittle Pentium 4 is outta date and your so stupid for still having it.
i could fill this page with flames. so i found so links that will do it for me :D
The truth. (an old article but the point are still valid.)
http://www.freeessays.cc/db/12/cot147.shtml
$1,438 to maintain my system? gimme a ***kin break!
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=4795
ahh, finnaly a mac usr i agree with.
http://www.lowendmac.com/myturn/01/1025.html
ofc you dont have viruses. you only hold %3 of the market share!
http://www.assortedstuff.com/archives/000155.html
a mac store owner dissin macs! w00t!
http://www.theshorthorn.com/archive/2002/fall/02-sep-19/sc091902-01.html
ok, sorry for the link overload. but if any of you have any free time *winks at sandwich* look through them.
oh btw... open this (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/ksickafoose/mac.wmv) its that funny mac movie. you know what i mean ;)
-
few years back my secondary computer was MAC in near future i plan buy another one so it would be my secondary computer
-
I only care that there will be MORE people playing Fs2.
That being said, and should I ever get the chance, I WILL get an
I-lamp. That Mac owned.
The way I see it, the PC is a sedan.
Mac has to be the Aston Martin. Pretty, sleek, does the job, but nobody can afford it.
As for the one button mouse, you WILL be amazed what people can do with it.
Mac USERS, welcome to Freespace 2!
Seems that Fs2 is planning to take over the world :drevil:
-
That mac movie was very funny... must show that to the linux-worshipping tutor in my Comp Sci lecture...
-
Originally posted by Descenterace
That mac movie was very funny... must show that to the linux-worshipping tutor in my Comp Sci lecture...
It's good but you can just as easily have a dig at Microsoft (http://www.ifilm.com/filmdetail?ifilmid=2433961)
-
Kazan, i dont dispute that PC's are becoming increasingly better in the graphic realm, but with the whole industry based on Mac (pretty much anyway), i dont see it changing for a while.
Anyway I have a Mac and PC i hate neither and i love them both.
-
Who cares if you play FS on a Mac or PC? As long as it means more people for the community, it's all good! :)
-
Macs are becoming rarer and rarer outside of specialist jobs, and even that is being effected as they pile more and more on the OS, OS5 and OS6 were dreams come true, OSX is like force feeding XP to Mac Owners, not a nice prospect :(
I use a PC, simply because the most software is most easily available for it, no other reason, but I know a few recording studios that use exclusively Macs, so I'm firmly in the 'Wahaaay, more people playing Freespace 2!' category ;)
Flipside :D
-
Originally posted by Flipside
OSX is like force feeding XP to Mac Owners, not a nice prospect :(
OSX debut:1999
Win XP debut: 2001
:wtf:
-
LOL So because OS-X came out first means the statement doesn't apply?
Flipside :D
-
Originally posted by Galemp
OSX debut:1999
Win XP debut: 2001
:wtf:
your point? uhh... i dont think im reading you there Galemp
-
Flipside said OSX was like force-feeding Windows XP to Mac owners, when in fact OSX came first. Then XP 'borrowed' most of the elements. So in fact Windows XP is like force-feeding OSX to PC owners. :ha:
BTW, I'm on a Mac right now. Does anyone have a working link to the port yet?
-
Interesting. Anyways, single-tasking OS's should be sold. :D That's why I like DOS. w00t Well, DOS did run multiple drivers, but you need that. ^ ^
-
I still have a DOS partition, so I can properly play legacy games like Syndicate and have full DOS4GW, HIMEM and SBPCI support. ;)
-
Single tasking can be a nightmare to programe.
Beside I like to listen to Winamp while playing a couple of titles.
-
Originally posted by Kazan
ok - MACS ARE NOT EVIL, anymore *gasp - i just said that!*
Mac hardware is kinda trashy, they overhype their products (But who doesn't!) the largest problem with their system is the hardware is proprietary.
[/i]) [/B]
IIRC, Macs were initially going to consider using an x86 chip (I think the 386, maybe earlier), but decided against it.... it pretty much forced them to go down their current road, because the company is too small to be a big player if they did switch to x86 - basically, they're Hd is their unique selling point. I remember readin an interview with theMac CEO, who was benmoaning the fact that Dell (as an example) had been able to market their com puters much more effectively.
Although, the CPUs used by Macs are a hell of a lot more efficeint than both the Pentium & AMD architectures, IIRC. I think they totally revised the G4(or whatever chip it was) when it went 64-bit, so they lost a lot of backwards compatibility but ended up with a far better chip design.
-
There's no point to pretend that recent x86 chips are backwards compatible.
I'd say they are compatible down to P2s, but nothing lower.
Mac did a sensible thing, and after all they deliver their whole comp as a single office equipment.
-
Originally posted by Flaser
There's no point to pretend that recent x86 chips are backwards compatible.
I'd say they are compatible down to P2s, but nothing lower.
Don't they retain the same base instruction set, though?
-
i can still run MS-DOS on my P3 800, i don't get it.
-
:wtf: Down to P2s? :wtf:
Then why do some of my friends HAVE NO TROUBLE AT ALL RUNNING PRE-386 GAMES ON THE PENTIUM 4? OK, so they're all insane for not worshipping the almighty Athlon XP (praise it! praise it!), but I wouldn't say that Pentiums are so awful that they're not backwards-compatible.
There are no instructions in the 8086 original instruction set that the Pentium 4 does not have. That's what defines it as an x86 chip: the instruction set.
-
The reason new stuff doesn't work on old chips is that the processor demand is too high, and because the internal architecture (motherboard, GFX, drivers, etc) on a machine still running a pre-P2 chip would be horrendously slow as well. Backwards compatable means the new chip can run old stuff, not the other way around. That's been one of my gripes with apple, in that a good bit of old stuff simply won't run on the new systems.
-
What I meant is several old programes can't be run on the new machines.
There are exception I never said there was no backwards compatibility all I said is that to actually state we have coherent true compatibility is a joke.
BTW most of whatever your friends might be running is a result of some kind of emulation - a feature that's OS dependant.
Go to VOGONS and ask them - I humbly assume, that they would agree.
The stuff that was traslated to 385/486 often has unsolvablve issues.
A lots of thins can be emulated so there's no such thing as software impossible to run, we may just not have the toold to do so far.
Please don't confuse the two.
Just because windows can handle old games it doesn't mean that the architecture of your processor does as well.
Ever tried to run Bioforge on anything above a Pentium 1?
-
Riiiiight... so Windoze is going to interpret the instruction opcodes in an older program and emulate the instructions no longer supported by the processor...
This DOES NOT HAPPEN. If a program runs, it means that all the instructions used by it ARE supported by the architecture of the CPU.
-
Wow, 4 pages of mac bashing, windows bashing, instruction optimization of CPU's. That while i searched for "freespace mac". There is a beta2 version of freespace2 for the mac, but i think it is based on a different linuxversion which in turn is i think based on the original sourcecode. (http://icculus.org/freespace2/)
My question to you is: Where can i find the SourceCodeProject (SCP) linux version? Second Question: Since much work is done on the engine in FreespaceOpen, How do the system requirements look? Because the original game engine ran well on a pentium200mmx.
I really hope some of the mac programmers pick this up and i hope we might end up with a true platform independent OpenFreespace.
-
lets just say that will all the new graphics features turned and once its optimized on it should need at least a 700 mhz and 3rd Generation video card (Geforce/Radeon)
-
My parents got a mac in 1989. It still works today, and it's still useable! We also have an iMac and two PCs. They're both fine, except when the Mac freezes for no reason and when the PCs decide to bugger themselves up for no reason. OSX is beautiful, and looks way better than XP - my XP PC is skinned to look like OSX. It works bloody well, too.
-
*high-fives Pyro*
-
Originally posted by Setekh
I still have a DOS partition, so I can properly play legacy games like Syndicate and have full DOS4GW, HIMEM and SBPCI support. ;)
... SBPCI support? SBPCI 128 maybe? I don't get mine to run under DOS, so if you know where I can get some drivers it would be appreciated ;)
-
Looked at the printer drivers for my Canon i250 today... Win98 and ME drivers are 15Mb. Pretty big, yes, but about right for modern drivers. Very good if you consider that it includes image-optimising software and publishing stuff.
WinXP/2000: 50Mb. Bloody ridiculous. But hey, I've got a 40Gb disk. I'm not bothered.
Mac OS X: 100Mb. And that's JUST THE DRIVER. The extra software isn't supported by Mac...
On the other hand, Linux doesn't HAVE any drivers for this printer. So in this case, the Mac is looking pretty good compared to Red Hat Linux 9.
BTW, found this cartoon:
'And good riddance, too!' (http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/?t=archives&date=2002-11-26)
And one about Linux:
'This can only mean trouble.' (http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/?t=archives&date=2002-12-04)
And one about Windoze:
'Logging on.' (http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/?t=archives&date=2003-02-07)
And this one's just generally funny:
'Say it... I dare you...' (http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/?t=archives&date=2002-11-01)
-
Blame Canon, not Apple... 100MB for a driver is like a a complete OS in there for handling printer stuff (or a complete CUPS, gimp-print, and Ghostscript packed together in an archive, but even that one isn't 100MB) This is a strange driver, indeed. A quick scan of canon website gives 3.8MB for MacOS 9 drivers and 4.7MB for Mac OS X, where do you get the 100MB driver from? "the extra software isn't suported by mac", actually again blaim canon for not including image/publishing software for mac or linux, don't blaim apple.
(ps. the first cartoon very nicely shows that a simpleton can use a mac (OSX) just as easy as a diehard tcsh/bash/gcc unix lover can use it :-) )
-
I wasn't actually blaming anyone for the huge file. Just wondering why the Mac apparently required an entire printer OS. These file sizes are based on the CD that came with the printer, and I expect that disk quota included swap/spooling space.