Project64 Forums

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

michelkenny 20th April 2007 07:21 AM

I say drop anything older than Windows 2000 for sure. If you want to drop 2000 go ahead too :) It's better to spend your time getting it to work on XP/MCE/Vista since that's what most people use.

Anonymous 20th April 2007 08:27 AM

written by AVarner
Don't support Vista. If you do, your condemning your soul to hell. Supporting Windows Vista is supporting evil. Use Windows XP - the lesser of two evils. A Linux version would be appreciated too.

As for old versions of Windows, 2000 shouldn't be too hard because it has most of the API's that XP had. No one uses Windows 98 anymore, except for playing games in DOS mode.

Anonymous 20th April 2007 03:57 PM

written by maybe
3 versions

**Ultimate Project64 for Win9x (and no continuo, maybe only bugfixes, no reason to keep on doing those OS's.-win200, win95, win98, winme)

**project64 for Windows

**and Linux version :-)

Philippi Christophe 20th April 2007 07:55 PM

Use Vista developpement ,but Xp is not dead too !
thanks to author jabo to develop plugin video for vista
thanks PJ64 team

Eddie 20th April 2007 08:28 PM

I think it's not worth to keep Win9x support at this point. As said before, people that can run the emu already have at least a Windows 2000 OS.

You should focus on Win2k/XP/Vista development, as they are the most popular these days.

Anonymous 21st April 2007 03:11 AM

written by D
Still support for Win2000, please. I use it and like it.

Optimis0r 21st April 2007 07:05 AM

damn spammers.

I would say optimise pj 64 1.7 for vista

Anonymous 21st April 2007 08:19 AM

written by Zufomec
Dont optamize for anything in perticular

but support everything you can, right back to win 95 if ya really want

and all you people who say vista is best, and dont support crappy old win98

have non of you noticed how the system requirements for vista are nearly twice as much as xp . and xp is more than twice as much as 98 . .its not because their better, its because win98 and win95 (also know as Windows NT . . cant remember what numbers tho) and XP AND vista and all versions of windows since 3.11 are based on windows NT, and any of the later versions while able to support bigger drives and more ram due to the 48bit addressing system are not much better than the erlier versions except by their fancy graphics and ability to make your computer even slower than the last version did


support for 98 up would be good (considering it and win 2000) are still the fastest windows OS' out there

linux and mac support would be good too

xannonite 21st April 2007 11:51 AM

ehh, it is not true that all versions of Windows since 3.11 are based on NT. Windows NT was a different product line. It wasn't until after Windows 2000 was released that Microsoft consolidated to a single Windows product line.

Windows 95, 98, and Me all use 16-bit and 32-bit code. Windows 2000 and XP are based on NT, which does not use 32-bit code. That's why it's difficult or impossible to run 16-bit applications on those operating systems.

Windows 9x may have much lower system requirements than 2000 or XP, but it's also not as capable as its successors. It suffers from unstable drivers, problems related to its 16-bit code, lack of new hardware support, etc.

Windows 2000 and XP are both pretty much the same at the core, though XP is more stable and has better hardware support. XP's system requirements are higher because it's GUI is more bloated than 2000's. If you turn all of that off, it's just as fast as 2000 (or even faster in some cases.) XP does need more memory no matter what, though. Windows 2000 would be the OS of choice if you only had 128-256MB of RAM.

Vista is just a monstrosity. Its minimum requirements for Premium/Business/Ultimate are about eight times those of Windows XP. Even if you exceed the minimum requirements, the OS is dreadfully slow, and the new interface is enough to drive a user mad. Things that used to be easy to get to are now buried with extra steps and endless pop-ups.

xannonite 21st April 2007 11:53 AM

Correction: NT does not use 16-bit code.

p.s. There needs to be an edit button for comments.

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:37 AM.

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