VOGONS


Reply 20 of 25, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Pretty much nothing you run in DOS was meant for or looks right in 16x9 aspect anyway (IMO). If your display surface is running in that aspect, the programs in DOSBox are going to have to be stretched.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder

Reply 21 of 25, by Ant_222

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
SieBoi wrote:

As far as i know the non official builds that has a support for opengl or directx lets you make your dosbox real, non stretched (there was a word for this i swear, i forgot) 16:9 (not the graphical programs they are stretched) however without those it can't even stretch to 16:9, that was what i was asking.

The real MS-DOS aspect ratio is almost always 4:3 and very rarely 8:5 (e.g. for games ported from Amiga). As far as I know, stock DOSBox will display in 4:3 if you have aspect=true and use opengl or openglnb, but that will give you interpolation artefacts. There are several patches, including mine, that implement pixel-perfect scaling to the correct aspect ratio.

Reply 23 of 25, by Ant_222

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Is there any situation in which DOSBox with aspect=true and interpolative output might display an image in an aspect ratio other than 4:3?

Reply 24 of 25, by Kerr Avon

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I think the people who write the various DOSBox forks and patches sometimes forget that, to many less tech-savy people, it is usually the case that you should always use the latest or most well equipped version of a program. They're taught this by Windows updates, programs such as virus killers that inform you every few days when it updates itself, in the answers to technical problems in PC magazines or Windows/PC based help websites, and so on. So it's natural that there must be lots of people who don't have too much experience of PCs, and so who might well never have found that a newer or upgraded version of a trusted program is somehow inferior to the older, long used version that they've replaced with the new version. And when such people see that there are different versions of DOSBox, then it's easy for them to assume that the newer versions, or the versions with added features, should be used instead of older versions.

More experienced people know that this isn't always the case, usually from painful experience, but it's not at all obvious, especially to someone who only tends to use official software, where mostly any potentially significant bugs and faults are found and eliminated before release.