Windows NT does not include DOS. It includes NTVDM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTVDM

People who want properly running DOS games in Windows NT use DosBox if they can. If they can't then they use NTVDM and put up with it's crap. Ideally they'd use the original hardware with MS-DOS but obviously that can be very difficult for most people and not realistic for people in the present/future who just want to play games. (as opposed to the game of trying to get the game to work).

The reason why the DosBox documentation is slanted for Windows\Linux users is because the devs use Windows\Linux. Almost no one on these forums works on DosBox for the Mac. Almost all of that works comes from other people not related to this site.

If you want better Mac Documentation then tell us what's wrong, write it yourself, or STFU.

Can you post the contents of your DosBox.conf and the version of DosBox that you are using? (You should be using DosBox 0.70 at least)

Yes I'm aware of that issue with NT, but for the love of Gates who is still running NT? I was refering to people posting who are trying to run things in DOSBox on win2k and XP, which seems pointless to me. Which begs the question why the main target would be a platform that doesn't need the utility, it seems the slant should be to Mac/ linux where you don't have DOS underpinnings.

Regardless, your attitude has put me right off the community. Apparently Mac users are not welcome. As it turns out I figured out how to make it run already anyway. There are default settings on the mac version that are counter to the documentation, which seems out of date to the current version, and which seem to not be the best for compatibility. Even with optimizing the settings however performance is poor compared to running in windows, and increasing CPU and cycle settings don't do anything past a point. It seems that there is a maximum cap on these settings, which is unfortunate since I still have at least 70% of my CPU free that could be used.

Windows 2k/XP/2003/Vista are NT. When I say Windows NT I am also referring to those other operating systems.

Windows NT 3.51
Windows NT 4.0
Windows NT 5.0 (Windows 2000)
Windows NT 5.1 (Windows XP)
Windows NT 5.2 (Windows 2003)
Windows NT 6.0 (Windows Vista)

They all pretty much use the same NTVDM with barely any compatibility difference. The biggest change to NTVDM was in XP with emulated SB sound (terrible compared to VDMSOUND) and the CLI/OP fix.
The next biggest change to NTVDM was in vista which eliminated full-screen DOS apps from working when using WDDM drivers and some loss in compatibility with 16bit applications.

The only reason it seems pointless to you is because you use a MAC and you are not aware of the difficulities involved of using DOS games on an NT system. Right off the bat you come in these forums and you can't figure out "for the life of me" why people would be using a DOS emulator on an NT system "because it already HAS DOS" when it obviously doesn't.

Regardless, your attitude has put me right off the community

Reread your post. Think about it. Read my post. Think about it. Try to think why I responded the way that I did to your post. Think about it some more. Then you can retract your incorrect statements in your lates post, be a big person and stop whining.

I already explained why the MAC documentation was not up to snuff with the Windows\Linux documentation and what you needed to do to help correct the situation.

Reasons performance can be poor using the MAC version of DosBox:

1. You are not using the latest version of DosBox.
2. You are not using a version of DosBox capable of Dynarec.
3. You are using a version of DosBox capable of Dynarec but have not configured dosbox to do so. (Set core=dynamic in DosBox.conf).

MAC users are welcome on these forums, but people that assume things about why people do things when the person doing the assuming doesn't have any knowledge of the systems that they are making statements about are definetly not welcome.

Finally, it's common knowledge that OSX is slower than Windows on the same hardware for certain apps. I have no idea of the performance difference in DosBox between Windows/OSX on the same hardware but all I ever hear from OSX users who have both OSX and Windows on their systems is how their MAC versions of their games on MAC run much faster in Windows when using their Windows version. Considering that most of DosBox development has been for Windows\Linux and that those are the OS's that most DosBox users use and that the dynamic core for DosBox in OSX was recently integrated into DosBox (Compared to dynamic core for Windows which was integrated back in 2004), I would not find it very suprising if DosBox is slower in OSX compared to Windows.

Just want to mention that I'm a user of DOSBox on a Mac and have received very useful and matter-of-fact answers from this forum. From what I see, Mac users are welcome here.

I run DOSBox on a PowerPC, and thus can't use the "dynamic core" setting, which makes my DOSBox experience slower than that of an x86 user, although fine for my needs.

But I am interested in hearing from Intel Mac users, because I plan to get an Intel Mac at some point and will want to run DOSBox on it. From what I understand, Intel Mac users can use the dynamic core setting to drastically increase speed. Have you tried that, and if so, did it allow you to boost the max CPU cycles at all?

If you/somebody else knows a bit about powerpc's assembler let me know,
maybe porting some recompiling stuff.

And right, mac users that seem to be just here to bash on other systems
for no obvious reason are not really welcome, as on most other forums.