Project64 Forums

Project64 Forums (
-   Site News (
-   -   Pj64 vs Windows (

Anonymous 20th July 2007 11:52 AM

written by KnyteOwl
Ok, here it is in a nutshell. I am a collector of rare PC console ports who has actually considered configuring my computer as a dual boot (XP Pro/98SE) for the sake of those old games--however, I've thought twice about it since it would demand running XP on FAT32, and I have found XP fixes for all but 1 (Sonic R). And as such, even I am willing to concede that there's no real need to keep the Win9x support around--it just bogs down development with all the extra testing.

Mac/Linux users need to show a little respect to the wishes of the dev team--these OS's while fine, are just too different, and it's already been made crystal clear multiple times that they want to keep PJ64 Windows ONLY! You guys have been bragging for years about being able to run Windows on a partitioned dual boot system, or even emulate it within the OS, so GO DO IT if these old N64 games really mean that much to you, and you insist on emulating them instead of buying a used N64 off ebay, or in a pawn shop. Older versions of PJ64 work just fine on even the most modest of XP/2K systems, and are readily available with plenty of 3rd party plug-ins, so it's not like you're being left out in the cold.

Windows XP/2K support should be retained because these are still viable operating systems allot of people use. DOS-based, Win9X OS's need to get the boot kick. Vista development is fine, but I would advise against it because of all the same reasons Nekurakami cited--my experience, as well as my friends who have bought it reflects nothing but headaches and regrets. WinXP Pro is the best Windows to date, and many people (Halo 2 cronies, and rich elitists buying purely for the sake of bragging rights not withstanding) are waiting until the first couple of Vista service packs have launched before purchasing. Vista is simply catching on too slowly to be worth devoting allot of time to--the overwhelming majority of your user base is staying with XP.

Anonymous 21st July 2007 07:08 PM

written by Cody
Should support MAc OS x

Anonymous 22nd July 2007 12:48 AM

written by Smoke
I like the old OS's too, but I am sorry, they are outdated, and continued support of them is not only a waste a time, but in the end halts overall progress by forcing the team to use outdated techniques just to cater to a very small percentage of users...

In the end it would accomplish nothing to support the 9x platform, because sooner or later its going to have to happen, they can't carry you forever, because your systems can only do so much, its hardware limitations, I know, I bit the bullet and spent a bit upgrading myself, but its well worth it, I can play awesome games like oblivion, with SM3.0, HDR, etc..

So trust me upgrade, by some good new games, you won't regret it, and let the team move forward without the fucking guilt trips..


Now, onto the newer systems..

WinXp 32 bit, is a no brainer, to many people use it to cut it out, same with 2k, which is XP, sort of, it could be considered XP's mother, and is basically the same system, Xp just has friendlier interface, and a little better driver/hardware support.. So XP, and 2k, should obviously remain supported..

Which leaves the 64bit OS's...

You should really support WinXP Pro x64 Edition, because we don't get no love from nobody, hardly,.. :(

This OS is completely neglected, and its really the best OS out there, its WinXP, and 64bit, its what Vista wishes it could be, its only problem is the lack of support for it(apps, games, etc), I doubt DX10 even works on it, which is lame considering its 64bit, so it should work, if M$ were so inclined it could, I think..

I have a dual boot with XP 32bit, and XP 64bit, and I benchmarked them both, XP 32bit got whooped on, and that was using a 32bit test(obviously on the same hardware), I seen a 10% increase in all aspects, had the test been 64bit based, I would have seen much more, at least another 10% I would imagine, so XP 64bit is truly superior to its 32bit counterpart, its just not very supported, even M$ doesnt really support it, they have pretty much dropped it to push Vista.

And so the developers of course have followed suit, thats why even though WinXP 64 outdates Vista, Vista has much more application, and driver support for it already.. (I think they released the beta XP 64 back in 2004, or 2005 somewhere in there,.)

Which brings me to my last comments, Vista, while it should be supported, because M$ is forcing it down everyones throats, should be a lower priority, at least until the majority of users migrate, I personally can't stand it, it took 15 minutes to find the control panel, and it kept harrassing me, are you sure, you just clicked a restricted item, please input your password, blah, blah,... STFU!!

Most annoying OS ever conceived, im sure you can turn most that crap off, but I am equally sure it wouldn't go down without a fight, it would more than likely harrass you every step of the way, I honestly don't know what the hell they were thinking, its supposed to be user friendly, yet it ended up being user abusive, annoying, bloated, etc, etc..

And worse of all its condescending, I felt like Vista should have had a target user guide on it, you know, a little picture of a guy in a helmet, on a short bus, drooling on himself, you know, a retard, because thats how that OS treats you, like you're retarded..

All the important stuff is hidden, and password protected, as if I am going to have a fucking spasm, and go click crazy or some shit, Im sorry M$ I am quite capable of not screwing up my PC, I don't need you holding my hand..

I am sure it was for a reason, perhaps so kids couldn't screw up stuff, or whatever, but still, not everyone has kids, or wears a helmet, and rides the short bus, you know, that crap should have been optional.. But, alas, instead you have to become a damn Vista expert, download all kinds of tools, and hacks, and spend 10 hours removing excess crap.. Not that XP was much different, but Vista was bullshit on a whole new level man..

To be fair, I am sure in time it will probably become a good system, a couple service packs, and some patience to aid you in shutting down, all the "helpers" they threw in, and it would probably be an alright OS, just like XP after its been fine tuned..

Anyways, sorry to go on for so long, I know I wrote a damn mini novel here, but simplicity isn't my style man.. ;)


P.s.. If any thing seems weird, or mispoken, its because I had to trim it down for length, cus the forum rejected my original post, so I haphazardly(sp?) went through trimming for length.. ;)

(Which also accounts for the large increase in obscenities, it was originally very well spoken, till I got pissed off at having to rewrite, and edit it..)

Anonymous 22nd July 2007 06:47 PM

written by unkown
linux support would be great

Anonymous 23rd July 2007 05:31 PM

written by VampireLordAlucard
Its amazingly easy to ditch 9x/ME/2000 support when your not stuck using it

For a long time, I was forced to use outdated systems. My family isnt into computers at all, with most of the computers I owned being outdated, free givaways. Its easy to say "upgrade, upgrade, its totally worth it!!" but getting the money to upgrade for teens (or younger..) can be difficult. Alot of people own cheap computers dialup, simply for the benefits of having a computer. Email, instant messaging, basic internet browsing, ect. There is probably a shockingly large amount of ppl in this situation that also use their computers for emulation.

Yet, if I was developing a program, I'd have a very, very hard time justifying the time investment of testing on 9x systems, to be honest. While it would be great for them to remain supported, it isnt really practical, I guess.

Continued support for Windows 2000 seems obvious, as it is still very widly used. If you do drop support for Win9x/ME, then make it very clear that PJ64 1.6 still works just fine with these OS. Besides, 'we' are used to not getting the absolutly best of everything, and finding programs that instead offer us something to do, and not worrying about what few features we may not be able to use..

Besides, not testing on 9x =/= incompatability. You might not test for 9x, but who knows, it might work anyway? XD

In the end, less testing more feature adding (for the majority) is where my vote goes, so I say drop 9x/ME.

Note: I was eventually able to get a decent WinXP comp, with AMD Athlon 64 3500 , 512 RAM, 130 GB HDD, so I am no longer apart of the mentioned minority..

Anonymous 23rd July 2007 08:50 PM

written by Ur Mum
I havent ever played this game so i cant comment ok but does this project 64 game have to go on a floppy disk tell me if it does and tell me if it dosent ok bye.

Anonymous 23rd July 2007 10:14 PM

written by tillin9
I'll put in another vote for Linux as top priority. In fact Project 64 is one of the few remaining reasons I still have any Windows version (XP Pro) on one of my machines. I've tried Mupen64 and there are still some major issues, mainly its too slow and the textures aren't fully aligned in many games. The same machine with PJ 1.6 dual booting into XP runs fine.

I know a lot more people who are trying to migrate from XP to Linux/ Mac than to Vista. If Microsoft wasn't forcing it down people's throats by trying to prevent XP from being sold, almost no one would be running Vista. And just to be fair, I actually have used it. I had to decide whether to upgrade one of our computer labs to Vista or keep the new machines with XP so I loaded Vista Ultimate on a Core Duo 2 with a Radeon X850 PE. It seemed slow! Considering Linux and XP fly on that machine, and I personally have no problems using older PIII Linux or older SGI IRIX workstations, all signs show there is something majorly wrong with Vista.

As far as 9x support, I'd vote to drop it. Machines that need 9x (worse than a single PII 450 Radeon 8500) can't really run PJ64 well either.

Anonymous 25th July 2007 12:55 PM

written by Lucas
Support for linux and mac os x would be cool, as well as support for outdated versions of windows, but if they make it open source, this won't be an issue.

Anonymous 27th July 2007 02:00 PM

written by HeadHunter2
I'm new to osx and i definately want to do not miss project64!!!!

Anonymous 30th July 2007 07:21 PM

written by dj_mab
Linux support would be great.

As far as windows, 2000 is still somewhat important but there is no real reason to keep supporting 98.

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:56 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.