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I like the old OS's too, but I am sorry, they are outdated, and continued support of them is not only a waste a time, but in the end halts overall progress by forcing the team to use outdated techniques just to cater to a very small percentage of users...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

Anonymous 31st July 2007 06:19 AM

written by Luke
I'd say drop 9x and add Linux support. It seems there are a lot of people trying to migrate to Linux and emulators are a great way to add games (one of the few areas Linux lacks).

Anonymous 31st July 2007 07:58 AM

written by Nik
I'd drop 9x support. Windows 2000 I can kinda see having but I don't think I actually know of anyone who still uses anything below XP or Vista. There's no reason not to really, and if people are unwilling to upgrade to the best version available (XP in this case) then they'll miss out on support for newer software. I don't think PJ64 should make an exception for them at the sacrifice of stability, time, and features.

Anonymous 3rd August 2007 12:41 AM

written by OM
I am all for Linux when it comes to saving my favorite old games. There are compatibility issues with every new Windows version. Linux would not waste your resources like this...

Anonymous 3rd August 2007 03:32 AM

written by Me
There are many linux versions as well, you cannot say that it doesn't waste your time.

Many people still use Windows 2000, so dropping that is not the best idea. Most software(except for Microsoft) still supports 2000. Most people who used Windows 95, 98, or Me, on the other hand, have upgraded by now.

I think you should support Windows:

houbou 5th August 2007 11:46 AM

Personally, I suspect that users with Win XP or better, will also have better performing hardware (more RAM, better motherboard, better video and stronger processor), then those operating Win 98/ME. So, obviously, it's easier for you to stick to WinXP or better, because you have an "easier" task of getting PJ64 to emulate the speed required to play games as on a real N64. I'm not a hardcore programmer, so, that being said, there could be a strong case where Linux would also be an alternate platform for you, seeing how efficient Linux is with resources.

Anonymous 6th August 2007 06:45 AM

written by Vinny
I always used project64 on my old XP computer and was ver happy with it but I moved to Macs and I really hope you guys can make a OS X version of it because the only ones out for it are terrible in comparison to your product.

Anonymous 6th August 2007 09:41 AM

written by angel
always used project64 on my old XP computer and was ver happy with it but I moved to Macs and I really hope you guys can make a OS X version of it because the only ones out for it are terrible in comparison to your product.

:) ;) :D ;D

Anonymous 13th August 2007 12:09 PM

written by infestedtassadar
Only the 32 and 64-bit versions of 2K, XP, and Vista should be supported; anything older then these are no longer being supported by Micro$oft. maybe keep an older version of project64 available for the older oses? A linux version would be nice though.

Anonymous 15th August 2007 01:54 AM

written by Delta Dreamer
One last try...

[written by DeadDude, July 19, 2007]
"3 Since the computers are older, the old 9x installations have already proven their durability (I can't believe EVERYONE overlooked this fact!)"

Finally, a voice of reason, in this vast sea of ignorance!

[written by DeadDude, July 19, 2007]
"My take on it is that anyone still running 9x **MUST** be doing something right."

Bravo! Now _that_ is what I call _respect_! Thank you, kind Sir. ;-) (And, the GEEKS shall inherit the Earth.)

[written by DeadDude, July 19, 2007]
"eventually, I foresee the W2K version going the way of the 9x version, but not for another 2-3 years at least."

Yeah, in about 5-7 years, I'm going to be laughing my @$$ off, when the recent crop of Micro$oft Bloatware, *also* becomes "obsolete". (heh heh heh)

[written by DeadDude, July 19, 2007]
"Which is why I say make a final version for 9x... makes everyone as happy as they will ever get..."

;-D - For a "DeadDude", _this_ guy sure is 'Alive' - Unlike, _all_ of the fascist 9x bashers, for whom have posted on this topic.

[written by KnyteOwl, July 20, 2007]
"WinXP Pro is the best Windows to date..."

Allow me to impose *my* opinion, too, since the most _obvious_ reasons for this topic are:
1. To beat the Code out of 9x, until it is in 'Alpha', again.

2. To allow 2KKK, XPee, and Vi$ta fan-people to kiss-up to their Master, Mr. B. G.

3. So, that said ignoramuses can spend their online time, freely flaming 9x users, with a new form of prejudice - OS-tracism.

4. So, Linux and Mac users can waste their time, trying to convince the Dev Team that their 'OS of choice' is *also* worthy of consideration, whilst our cries fall on 'deaf ears'.

[written by Smoke, July 22, 2007]
"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 bulls**t on a whole new level man.."

HA HA HA! Now, that's the best description of the, so-called, "Windows eXPerience", that I've seen to date! When Win98SE (rarely) tells me that I need "Administrator rights", I just Bitch-slap it with my brain, and continue-on with my session, without frustration. (I will _not_ be assimilated - Persistence is brutal!)

By the way: Does no one else realize, that we're debating about emulating an obsolete Console, on an obsolete OS, using what will eventually be, an obsolete Emulator? {Sigh}

Well, I rest my case - Y'all keep on having fun beating this 'dead horse' topic. It now seems like a _moot_ _point_, in my opinion...

Anonymous 15th August 2007 07:23 AM

written by el parci
>:( esta pagina me da asco jodanse, todos son unos ñoños unos nerds, vallanse al averno jotos

Anonymous 26th August 2007 09:55 PM

written by Dimio
I would like to keep Win2k support! :D

Anonymous 29th August 2007 05:41 AM

written by Chocolate Muffin Fadger
I need to get prodject 64 for windows 2000

Anonymous 31st August 2007 06:23 PM

written by Jerry
I'm in favor of making it open-source. I'd like to see support for Windows 2000, and if it's open-source, someone can make a fork. I think we should push the developers to re-license under the GNU GPL. Who's with me?

Anonymous 8th September 2007 06:44 PM

written by KnyteOwl
This one's for 'Delta Dreamer'

Never ONCE did I diss Win9x operating systems in any way. As a collector of rare PC console ports which often demand older, discontinued operating systems to run, I simply pointed out what should be a couple of few obvious things:

1: I collect rare PC console ports which often demand Win9x operating systems to run, and even being in this tiny niche group, WinXP fulfills even MY needs as the ONLY remaining WinXP incompatible title I have and haven't been able to find a compatibiltiy fix for is Sonic R.

2: The inclusion of these operating systems bogs down development time because it demands testing on a wider variety of operating systems.

3: The Win9x userbase is shrinking by the day--even now, it's userbase has gotten so small that only an increasingly small niche group of people who like me who collect rare PC console ports which there are no XP fixes available for still use it--and even then, not as a primary OS in most instances.

4: Older versions of PJ64 remain readily available, and work fine with the exception of minor glitches in a handful of titles.

If that's your idea of "flaming" Win9x users, you are WAY too trigger happy pal. I used Win98SE for a long time after WinXP launched (even to the point of being mocked by peers), and have absolutely nothing against it, or anyone who continues to use it. But dude--seriously--XP is faster. XP is more stable. XP supports more devices. XP is more compatible with modern hardware. XP is more feature-rich, and user friendly. And XP has even been combed down to the point that there are user-created compatibility fixes available for all but the ABSOLUTE rarest of PC console ports. And as before, my own experience with Vista, as well as my friends reports, and even the word of a tech who WORKS ON COMPUTERS FOR A LIVING reflects nothing but headaches and regrets after "upgrading" to it. And that's not a diss either--it's simply saying that Vista is having some teething pains that need to be ironed out before people begin to flock to it. Sorry, but based on these things, I stand by my assertion that WinXP Pro is the best Windows to date. That's my OPINION, I presented it respectfully, and am not shoving it down anyone's throats, and I'm entitled to it.

And in response to your "tracism" characterization (trash facism=tracism), my beliefs which you know nothing about since you don't know me are the POLAR OPPOSITE of facism, and I always have been, and will continue to always be respectful when I post on forums. You're waaaaaaaaaaaaay out of line pal--you're the one resorting to name calling, and attacking people for respectfully expressing a valid opinion--not me. Now who's the "tracist"? Maybe you'd better go do some soul searching before responding to that one . . . .

Anonymous 10th September 2007 08:44 PM

written by Josh
I'm going to cast my vote for Linux also. There are more Kubuntu/Ubuntu users than Vista users. Hell, the ONLY reason anybody uses Vista is because it was installed on their PC by the manufacturer and they don't know any better. Dell forced M$ to offer XP on new machines since all the customers who needed/wanted Windows and knew what they were doing didn't want Vista either. Linux won't be a waste of time as desktop Linux only continues to grow. Since Mupen64 exists and uses the same plugin system as Project64, I don't know why its so hard to port.

This is my analysis of XP. Every install I spent 1 hour installing and 2 hours removing all the extra crap, turning off services I didn't need, dealing with the endless patches and updates, and then the WGA crap. Meanwhile Linux was getting better and better. Finally I got tired of M$'s beta quality OSes and switched over to Linux full time. I still have a Windows partition with an old version of XP and nearly the ONLY thing I use it for is Project 64. The dev team should switch to Linux support immediately and ignore Vista. Leave in support for Win 9x since in many ways those OSes worked better than anything today.

Anonymous 12th September 2007 02:04 PM

written by Bruce
Windows sucks and there really should be a Linux version. Re-licensing under an open-source license such as GPL is the best solution to this dilemma. If Project64 was open source, people could create Linux and BSD forks (or maintain compatibility with obsolete versions of Windows).

Anonymous 23rd September 2007 05:08 PM

written by nmn
At least try to support wine or something.

I ain't gonna restart to run PJ64... I'm actually trying to find the source to nineteen64 0.9.9 at this moment, but i'm certain they hadn't released it before it got abandoned. So, I'd actually be willing to go through disassembly to get some pointers, get the old source code, and update it, Then go through porting just to get a good n64 emulator on Linux. Now, I know my message means nothing, But has anyone searched for the word Linux on this page? Theres a lot of occurances...

The demand for a good n64 emulator running on Linux is crazy. Please... Help us. I know you don't want people to discuss it and its not gonna happen, but for Christs sake I'm going crazy over this... (Goes back to WINE and disassembly)

Anonymous 23rd September 2007 05:28 PM

written by nmn
Oh, BTW, I'm aware of the fact that WINE runs the Project64 core great but the graphics are my concern. I use Rice anyways (Kirby64 works on it... I was helping my brother get it running, ask him why XD... BTW, for that game, the only perfect combo I know of: Interpreter CPU on 1964 with Rice Video 6.1.0c) so i can run OpenGL mode wonderfully, but Jabo's Video plug in is really nice for most things, and the GUI erases to black in every 3D frame on all plug ins... Sure, I can figure that one out eventually myself, but still. Sometimes there are small issues other than that, but i make custom Wine builds so i can throw in a few patches for myself...

Anonymous 25th September 2007 04:10 PM

written by Larry
Mupen64 is still being developed. There hasn't been an update on the news page, but I contacted the developers awhile ago, and they're still working on it. nmn, maybe you could join the dev team?

Anonymous 30th September 2007 12:35 PM

written by nmn
I'd love to, but I'm afraid I'm pretty sure I could never get into the team... They wouldn't acccept me, most likely, either since my primary OS is Linux, or because I'm not very big on optimizations, Or I'm just plain not a good enough programmer. I guess I'll ask, but I'm really new at joining projects - I usually work alone, and I wouldn't give too many actual benefiting changes to the emulator, mostly port work. In the meantime, My work on porting 1964 has risen, but parts of the code are confusing, very non-standards-compliant, and there isn't much motive to port an older version for me... Oh well. And Mupen64 - its decent... But it still has a long way to go, unlike 1964 or Project 64. It won't run properly on my 64-bit PC (Though with software video i got a nice little randomly colored vertical line in the center of the screen for a second or two after booting Kirby64, the only ROM on this PC, and I'm too lazy to transfer any other ROMs in my possession from my old computer), and I'm yet to test it on my 32-bit one. The point is, if i could even get into the PJ64 team, I'd definitely be willing to help port this thing over, and if 1964 were better written(It seriously misses the mark with standards compliance, not counting the easy-to-port windows.h references, but thats not to say its BADLY written), I'd probably already have ported it over (I've ported half GUI and stubbed the other half, ported half of the processor emulator, the plug-ins system, but it won't all compile yet, and I'm sure some of it is already badly ported because it was a quick one)

Anonymous 30th September 2007 03:03 PM

written by nmn
As usual, i screw up and get the wrong meaning. I will try to join mupen. I just fixed my damn GTK libraries (I now despise GTK) and tested it... And after coming back, i reread your post, and OMG, You mean join the Mupen Team, not PJ64, which makes more sense than what i assumed (because i read too fast, sue me. :P)

My test results with Mupen? Holy hell. It got WAY further than i imagined... I started with GLn64, which i wasn't really comfortable with in the past, And oh my goodness the only ROM i copied to my new computer, the one that ALWAYS gave me trouble, Kirby64, actually ran pretty good. I got Rice to work, and wow, it had less bugs than it did on both 1964 and Project64 at first glance (But of course, Project64 is better, Mupen has some limitations that just can't be broken easily/practically with X11/Linux) ... Despite how I thought they were doing based on my last use of Mupen, They really are doing a fine job, and its not too far behind after all. Even if i could only do a certain level of optimization work and little CPU work, I'd be glad to make it a little cooler as the PJ64 team is doing with PJ64 1.7, Or perhaps i could port the new unofficial Rice video plugin, Or perhaps both, never know.

Anonymous 2nd October 2007 11:55 AM

written by Foolzage
I think, supporting windows are like default, (2000, XP, Vista) But I really believe, make it support with Linux and Mac. will be the next step. As you say, you want some day, you can call this project done. and I believe, at that point, there will be so many people using Linux and Mac. So why not give them a sweet taste on your sweet project. I am Project64 fans for 6 years. But not I can't even use it natively because I have switch to Linux. which seem like a much better system. and I love it.
You are the greatest. because of you the dream of N64 come true.

squall_leonhart 5th October 2007 05:15 AM


written by Delta Dreamer, May 25, 2007

"written by Smiff". "because PJ64 has always been a Windows emulator. porting to Linux would be a major task."

No disrespect, but can ya'll read the above quote? I'm sure Linux and Mac OS-X are fine operating systems, but unless someone volunteers to write the appropriate Ports, this is non-discussion, IMHO.

Besides, I believe one of the Dev team members already asked us to keep this focused on 'Windows' versions. Am I correct?

Someone, please correct me if i'm wrong, but won't Vista's lack of support for DirectSound make it difficult to support it AND all of the OSes preceeding it (ie. NT/98/98SE/ME/2000/XP)?

If so, maybe a 'Vista ONLY' sound Plug-in could solve that problem.

Oh yeah, Noobs; this smart "hobo" has Win98SE running on a AMD Athlon 1700 at lightning speed, with PJ64. I suggest you not make asumptions about what can, or can't be done, until you have tried it yourself. Of course, i'm talking to people that suggest a full re-install, when they get a fatal BSOD {sigh}.

Hey Dev team, I think ya'll should focus on the Core emulation, that's what's important. As long as the Plug-in specs remain compatible, I could still use the older Plug-ins with the new Core. Am I wrong?
because most of yall are wrong

DirectSound is not removed from Vista.
DirectSound Hardware, and 3D are removed from vista.

the Software implementation of Directsound still exists within Vista, and there are plenty of vista users using emulators that require Dsound support.

PJ64 has never by default supported Hardware Directsound until the latest audio build which can do both.

squall_leonhart 5th October 2007 05:22 AM

and for the last time


if you want it so badly, take your GNU, stick it, and make your own emulator so others can fuck the code up.

the topic specifically, SPECIFICALLY, mentions Windows, not Linux.

Lastly, i am sick and tired of people with systems too weak to run PJ64 coming and asking for help, the majority of them are running either Win9X or early Win2k systems which just don't have the hardware support.

theres a reason microsoft doesn't support 9x anymore... and thats because its antique, and theres no point in raising the dead.

squall_leonhart 5th October 2007 05:26 AM

now in finally, there are some features of XP that aren't supported in 2K, mainly in the virtual memory mappings kernel security.

which luckily won't effect PJ64, at all, there fore, Windows 2000 would be quite easy to maintain support, and being that NT6 is and as a compatibility mode for XP, then theres no reason it won't support PJ64 either.

Anonymous 28th October 2007 05:16 AM

written by John Dinky
An xbox version of PJ64 would be nice. There are many modders out there and would be highly appreciated.

Anonymous 1st November 2007 12:49 PM

written by ghoul
what are you guys talking about

Anonymous 5th November 2007 05:19 PM

written by MonkBoy!!
1-Need support a Kaillera!! The Kaillera its a multy Player plugin!!!
2-Need input turbo buttom per buttom
3-Need trasnfer pokemon game of N64 to Game boy emulator Pokemon game,
4-Need Hack Rouble Pack support in Mario Kart, rs.................

Anonymous 7th November 2007 11:12 PM

written by Nelson

written by Danial Horton, October 05, 2007

and for the last time


if you want it so badly, take your GNU, stick it, and make your own emulator so others can f**k the code up.

the topic specifically, SPECIFICALLY, mentions Windows, not Linux.

Lastly, i am sick and tired of people with systems too weak to run PJ64 coming and asking for help, the majority of them are running either Win9X or early Win2k systems which just don't have the hardware support.
True, this topic DOES specifically mention Windows, but going open-source would solve the problem on both ends. I personally don't think the PJ64 developers should care about maintaining compatibility with Windows 9x, but if the source code was available, someone else could create a fork that works with older operating systems.
There are only a few N64 emulators for Unix-like systems, and they all seem to be unmaintained, understaffed, or pure crap. I don't think the PJ64 developers should port their software to Unix if they don't want to, but if the code is available, any programmers who want to run PJ64 on Unix have the freedom to port it themselves.

So let's recap:
* Project64 re-licenses under GPL
* Linux users excitedly port the software to Unix-like systems, and call it something clever like Lintendo64
* The PJ64 developers make more progress than ever because they don't have to waste time dealing with requests for a Linux version
* Everyone who still uses Windows 9x for whatever stupid reason realizes that Windows sucks anyways and makes the switch to Linux so they can run the special Unix port that exists in this hypothetical world that could easily exist if people were more understanding and just released their code under free software licenses.
* Project64 gets even better because they can use code from the Unix port, so the workload is somewhat divided
* Everyone celebrates and eats pizza

Project64 is already freeware, so what do the developers have to lose by going open-source, other than headaches that result from hourly requests for a Linux version?

Anonymous 10th November 2007 02:39 PM

written by Hellwolf_36
In my opinion, I think you should stay with 2000/XP/Vista and maybe some forms of Linux when you can. Cause 95/98 is discontinued except in some businesses that use it for cash registers or something minor.

As for Vista, I am running P64 and I am having no problems with any games, except for the usual engine problems. The thing is, if you install DirectX End User Runtime, you do end up getting DirectMusic (which is being deprecated) dlls you need to run Jaboo's.

However, if you do plan on developing it on Vista, you should try to make it Dx10 compatiable, for video purposes (if you did the above, sound and music aren't a problem).

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.