TheGreatCodeholio wrote:They did. There are PC-98 specific versions of Windows 3.0, 3.1, 95, and 98. There are also PC-98 specific versions of Windows NT, apparently.
SA1988 wrote:TheGreatCodeholio wrote:They did. There are PC-98 specific versions of Windows 3.0, 3.1, 95, and 98. There are also PC-98 specific versions of Windows NT, apparently.
Up to Windows 2000 PC98.
danrevella wrote:TheGreatCodeholio wrote:Are you saying that VGA state is not being saved/restored properly?
http://www.ctyme.com/intr/rb-0222.htm
yes, so many cheat utility like game buster and Infinity machine are unable in working...
when you return to the game the screen is black.
AnnaWu wrote:SA1988 wrote:TheGreatCodeholio wrote:They did. There are PC-98 specific versions of Windows 3.0, 3.1, 95, and 98. There are also PC-98 specific versions of Windows NT, apparently.
Up to Windows 2000 PC98.
WindowsNT4.0 too.
https://sites.google.com/site/np21win/setup/win2000
https://sites.google.com/site/np21win/setup/winnt4-0
TheGreatCodeholio wrote:The development tools I have make it difficult for me to support Windows XP. Specifically, Visual Studio 2017 has a Windows XP target but certain key C library functions like stat() are broken in a way that prevents them from working on Windows XP (but work fine with Vista and higher). Apparently this has been a known issue since VS2015.
I state that I personally won't support Windows XP, but patches from others who can compile for XP are welcome, because if they don't, continued development may break Windows XP support.
TheGreatCodeholio wrote:Yes. I had to remove the dynamic core code, because it has slowly bitrotted over the years. It's also not compatible with the way emulation and page fault handling works now. Even if you did manage to run Windows 98 in DOSBox-X today, the dynamic core would mishandle page faults in a way that would eventually cause WIndows 98 to crash.
TheGreatCodeholio wrote:Yes, Windows 98 runs slower without the dynamic core.
As I said though, the dynamic core doesn't quite handle page faults the way they need to be handled. Windows 95 and higher require the emulation to support task switching even during a page fault, which dynamic core (and anything other than normal) are not designed to handle.
Dominus wrote:There is no reason. It's just that people assume 64bit is better on a 64bit system. And on linux it's a bit more of a hassle to build 32bit when the system is 64bit.
Dosbox SVN has a working 64bit core but it's still not up to 32bit dynamic core, having problems with some games and still being a lot slower on OS X.
Dosbox-x forked before that improvement and just doesn't allow dynamic core on 64bit (AFAIK).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests