windows 98
Re: windows 98
I'd just ditch those old machines and run 98 in a VM if I absolutely needed it. No need to have archaic machines drawing power and taking room.
Re: windows 98
Then Run streets of sim city.SGMonkey wrote:Windows XP, 7 and 8, can run any game made for 98.cdoublejj wrote:I use 98 still, i have a dedicated 98se machine. why? because it can run games xp,vista,7,8 cannot run. games that dos box can't run either. however since i have i tend to put game on there that do run on xp and alter as well. why not? i have the space and power.
This was my current belief also.Tarius wrote:What are you talking about? It will end up being faster because it will be able to take full advantage of computer resources instead of a single core/video card.
The only reason it currently sucks is because it isnt optimized yet.
-
sirherrbatka
- Posts: 2159
- Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 17:21
Re: windows 98
Because there is no way we will support windows 98 and windows 98 hardware i moved this to the offtopic. If you want to share non-OpenMW related opinions and thoughts on this system, feel free to do so.
-
TheMechanist
- Posts: 59
- Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 22:08
Re: windows 98
May I be so free? I think that Win98 sucks!
To be honest when I used it I was about 8 years old and grew quickly to WinME which..sucked. If I would have known there was a Linux alternative out there and how to install it I would propably changed it as soon as that.
Sadly I stayed with it playing Commandos and C&C, until the fine day WinXP arrived and my family got a 3D-Accelator-Card
Heck Win has never been totally useless, but staying with a over +10 year old system just for DOS compability? Just go for a dual boot system, but that has been mentioned here before
I'm not meaning to offend you (well a tiny little sarcastic bit maybe, sry), but please realize that this small and busy team propably has better things to do, than supporting an decade old OS, especially because besides you nobody else is likely to play OpenMW on it
However this is an Open-Source project, so I guess you are free to do your best to support it yourself or with some of your Win98-Community members. Better more features than less! Good luck with that, but it will take some hard work I guess
If you are looking for a small and modern Linux you probably check out some LXDE or OpenBox enviroments. An alternative would be ArchLinux where you can choose most of the components yourself.....
To be honest when I used it I was about 8 years old and grew quickly to WinME which..sucked. If I would have known there was a Linux alternative out there and how to install it I would propably changed it as soon as that.
Sadly I stayed with it playing Commandos and C&C, until the fine day WinXP arrived and my family got a 3D-Accelator-Card
Heck Win has never been totally useless, but staying with a over +10 year old system just for DOS compability? Just go for a dual boot system, but that has been mentioned here before
I'm not meaning to offend you (well a tiny little sarcastic bit maybe, sry
), but please realize that this small and busy team propably has better things to do, than supporting an decade old OS, especially because besides you nobody else is likely to play OpenMW on it However this is an Open-Source project, so I guess you are free to do your best to support it yourself or with some of your Win98-Community members. Better more features than less! Good luck with that, but it will take some hard work I guess
If you are looking for a small and modern Linux you probably check out some LXDE or OpenBox enviroments. An alternative would be ArchLinux where you can choose most of the components yourself.....
Re: windows 98
3.1 was better, in the long-standing tradition of older Windows OS'es being better than the others. To be fair, 3.1 was also my first Windows, so there may be some (unduly) rose-tinted glasses, and I don't know that I was fully able to speak when I first started using it.
The argument about "Let's have old versions of Windows" is only valid from an archival standpoint, and if you want an old version of Windows to run legacy software and re-create the old-time feel, why would you then turn around and ask for someone to go and make new software for it? At that point you may as well just reskin Windows 9 (which I am very skeptical about the final quality of, by the way).
The argument about "Let's have old versions of Windows" is only valid from an archival standpoint, and if you want an old version of Windows to run legacy software and re-create the old-time feel, why would you then turn around and ask for someone to go and make new software for it? At that point you may as well just reskin Windows 9 (which I am very skeptical about the final quality of, by the way).