gerry wrote on 2021-09-21, 09:35:

how about XP 64 bit edition - something I've never used but seems suited to those early 2 core systems, at least on paper. Not sure how they deal with the single core expecting 32 bit games of the time though

I remember installing xp x64 for the first time when it came out. God I loved that OS. So stable! Server 2003 more or less.

The only reason to run Windows XP 64bit Edition is to try FarCry patched for 64 bit 😁

(it's in my "because I can" to-do list since a long time)

dionb wrote on 2021-09-21, 07:10:

Exactly. You don't even need that many computers. If you have one or two well-chosen DOS computers in the sub-1GHz range, there is exactly no need to worry about DOS compatibility on Windows boxen, and if you needed more than that, it would be at the bottom end (XT), not faster than any DOS game actually needs.

Of course, nothing wrong with accepting the challenge of getting DOS stuff to run on 21st Century machines, but it's only really needed if you only want one retro system to cover everything (bad idea IMHO unless space is REALLY at a premium, even a thin client/ITX box with 686B southbridge is much easier), or have another overriding reason to particularly want to do DOS on such a system.

I second this statement about the amount of computers, I find 12 computers just for DOS ridiculous and redundant. Only one XT-based and a late 90s computer with slowdown utilities is good enough for DOS and PC booter games. I ocasionally run demoscene programs where one can really see how flaky the VESA implementation is with many video cards. 😉

Currently I have two old computers which are Socket 7 (K6-2+/450) and Slot 1 (PIII-750), the latter where high performance is really needed for old stuff. I'm mostly focused on DOS though.

Cyberdyne wrote on 2021-09-21, 10:14:

XP 64-bit is more or less a BETA product, and not really needed/usable for some sort of gaming especially.

dionb wrote on 2021-09-21, 11:18:

XP 64b is a totally different beast, driver and software support was pretty limited. I'd avoid and go Windows 7 if 64b is required.

Windows XP x64 edition (not to be confused with Windows XP 64-bit edition since that was for Intel Itanium CPUs) is actually based on Window Server 2003 (that's why there isn't a Service Pack 3). It isn't a "beta" product, the reason for the lack of adoption was due to 64-bit in desktop was in its infancy and the lack of drivers like dionb said. No 16-bit software support could be another factor but that's also true for later 64-bit versions of Windows outside of using virtualization or a wrapper such as OTVDM.

I used XP 64-bit when it was current. After the different he companies released some driver updates for it it was fine.

I was running either an AMD Opteron 165 or an Intel Q6600 at the time.

Gmlb256 wrote on 2021-09-21, 12:11:

I second this statement about the amount of computers, I find 12 computers just for DOS ridiculous and redundant. Only one XT-based and a late 90s computer with slowdown utilities is good enough for DOS and PC booter games. I ocasionally run demoscene programs where one can really see how flaky the VESA implementation is with many video cards. 😉

And I totally agree. I just like building the old computers as well. If I didn't like playing with the hardware, I'd have only a few and be done with it 😀

canthearu wrote on 2021-09-21, 15:10:

Gmlb256 wrote on 2021-09-21, 12:11:

I second this statement about the amount of computers, I find 12 computers just for DOS ridiculous and redundant. Only one XT-based and a late 90s computer with slowdown utilities is good enough for DOS and PC booter games. I ocasionally run demoscene programs where one can really see how flaky the VESA implementation is with many video cards. 😉

And I totally agree. I just like building the old computers as well. If I didn't like playing with the hardware, I'd have only a few and be done with it 😀

Exactly. I also have far too many, particularly Windows 2000 systems (a P3-650, dual P3-933 and P3-1400S). Purely about the hardware. All I ever run on them in terms of software is UT'99 to check stability 😉

I have a Pentium 4 (again) but I hardly use it because I can run all the same software on Linux on my dual Xeon and the experience is hardly any different - this is via Wine/Lutrix/Steam/etc. Which is my main computer. Honestly, I Could do this with DOSBOX too and VMs for Windows 9x, but I find those way more fiddly than the old hardware is.

A few titles like Diablo and Quake can lean the other way - those are usually handled by my NEC Versa M/75 or P/75, or my 486 Desktop.

canthearu wrote on 2021-09-21, 15:10:

Gmlb256 wrote on 2021-09-21, 12:11:

I second this statement about the amount of computers, I find 12 computers just for DOS ridiculous and redundant. Only one XT-based and a late 90s computer with slowdown utilities is good enough for DOS and PC booter games. I ocasionally run demoscene programs where one can really see how flaky the VESA implementation is with many video cards. 😉

And I totally agree. I just like building the old computers as well. If I didn't like playing with the hardware, I'd have only a few and be done with it 😀

Oddly, the one computer I really "need" is the one I don't have. All of my computers are equally capable of playing dos and windows games with the appropriate slowdown utilities, but I don't have a computer with a proper CGA card and a 8088. But that is so outside my wheelhouse that there isn't any point building one. I wouldn't know what to do with it or how to set it up.

aspiringnobody wrote on 2021-09-22, 00:07:

Oddly, the one computer I really "need" is the one I don't have. All of my computers are equally capable of playing dos and windows games with the appropriate slowdown utilities, but I don't have a computer with a proper CGA card and a 8088. But that is so outside my wheelhouse that there isn't any point building one. I wouldn't know what to do with it or how to set it up.

Yeah, I've got an XT class build, but it is running VGA instead of CGA. Don't know where to get a CGA/EGA monitor, or the I/O card for it. At least for a price that isn't crazy.

I will just live in hope that the vast vast majority of software I want to run on the XT class machine is also compatible with VGA.

canthearu wrote on 2021-09-22, 00:26:

aspiringnobody wrote on 2021-09-22, 00:07:

Oddly, the one computer I really "need" is the one I don't have. All of my computers are equally capable of playing dos and windows games with the appropriate slowdown utilities, but I don't have a computer with a proper CGA card and a 8088. But that is so outside my wheelhouse that there isn't any point building one. I wouldn't know what to do with it or how to set it up.

Yeah, I've got an XT class build, but it is running VGA instead of CGA. Don't know where to get a CGA/EGA monitor, or the I/O card for it. At least for a price that isn't crazy.

I will just live in hope that the vast vast majority of software I want to run on the XT class machine is also compatible with VGA.

Kind of same..... I have a mostly-working Turbo XT machine with an 8088 & CGA, but it's been mostly sitting on the shelf, since I don't have a proper CGA display, not to mention the expertise and time to do the other maintenance it needs. So if I use it, it's with a VGA card, and I've not gotten around to troubleshooting the floppy or the hard drive.

Yeah, these old CRTs are too valuable for casual use. I only use mine when I need to test something. The rest of the time I use VGA.

Errius wrote on 2021-09-22, 01:39:

Yeah, these old CRTs are too valuable for casual use. I only use mine when I need to test something. The rest of the time I use VGA.

From having watched a few of the YouTube videos about cga I thought composite was the way to go anyway. Can't the composite output be hooked up to any TV?