| Author |
Message |
Lionel Fouillen
Gamorrean
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
 Posted: Dec 07, 2003 21:33 Post subject: Ouch! DF won't install on my WinXP! |
   |
|
I wanted to reinstall DF on my PC to see what's still left to do in Archangel 3 (I can imagine the dust and cobweb in the backup GOB  ) but...
It can't install. When I launch the install from Windows, the DOS program pops up but nothing happens, not even an error message. COuld it be because I want to install on a NTFS partition (Windows XP Home)?
|
|
Taton
Trandoshan
Joined: 25 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 07, 2003 23:05 Post subject: |
 |
|
I think partitioning your harddrive would be best.
I've tried ALL the compatibility options on DOS programs, and they never work.
_________________
"A fight should be clean and elegant, without waste"
-Asuka Langley Sohryu, Evangelion |
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 07, 2003 23:15 Post subject: |
|
|
While partitioning the HD is always a good idea, it's unrelated to your problem.
Are you sure you correctly specified the source drive for the installation?
|
|
Barry Brien
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 08, 2003 01:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Lionel. Good to see you're still working on Archangel 3. We can't wait.
|
|
Lionel Fouillen
Gamorrean
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
|
The MAZZTer
Death Star
Joined: 25 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 08, 2003 12:20 Post subject: |
|
|
I think you can just copy the files directly from the CD... I haven't installed it in a while though, so I forget the exact way to do it.
And don't forget to put the CD.ID file in a root of a hard drive, so that you can skip the CD check. Very useful indeed.
_________________
http://www.mzzt.net/ | I am a respectable admin with a respectable sig. |
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
|
Nottheking
Kell Dragon
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 08, 2003 16:23 Post subject: |
|
|
That brings a question back to my mind, one that has plagued me ever since the release of WinXP:
Why did Microsoft hack the DOS prompt down for later versions of Windows, when it should be well known that the only real reason some still use it is to play DOS-based games? I would think that it should have been left fully functional in the terms of resources, so that games like DF could be played under them without a hitch.
_________________
Wake up, George Lucas... The Matrix has you.. |
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 08, 2003 16:29 Post subject: |
|
|
Do you want a technical answer to that or was that just a general complaint?
|
|
Nottheking
Kell Dragon
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 08, 2003 16:50 Post subject: |
|
|
That depends on how you interpret it. Strictly, the question is incorrectly asked, so there is no real answer to it.
However, we can break down your question in smaller pieces and discuss them, even if they can not all be strictly answered.
But first a definition: there is no DOS prompt in Windows NT. There is the command prompt, which gives you the ability to interpret batch commands. There is also the NTVDM (the NT Virtual DOS Machine), which can emulate parts of the hardware/software architecture commonly used by DOS programs. These two systems aren't really related (you can run DOS programms without the command prompt, and the command prompt itself isn't actually a DOS program). In the following discussion, I will sometimes assume your reference to "DOS" is to the command prompt, and sometimes to the NTVDM, depending on the situation.
Nottheking wrote:
Why did Microsoft hack the DOS prompt down for later versions of Windows
They didn't. On the contrary, the Windows XP NTVDM is significantly more advanced than, say, the Windows NT 4 NTVDM. The same goes for the command prompt.
Nottheking wrote:
it should be well known that the only real reason some still use it is to play DOS-based games
Not true. The only purpose of the command prompt is to run batches or batch commands. The main purpose of the NTVDM is to run business applications that have not yet been ported to Windows. Official support for running games through the NTVDM was only added at a later stage, as a bonus. It is highly unlikely that someone would have bought a DOS game but never a DOS based OS.
Nottheking wrote:
I would think that it should have been left fully functional in the terms of resources
Since there never has been a fully functional DOS emulator in NT, they could not have left it fully functional.
Nottheking wrote:
so that games like DF could be played under them without a hitch.
The keyword here is "like". Yes, they could have implemented emulation services that would have allowed DF to run without a hitch in the NTVDM. However, that would most likely have stopped other games from running. Since a DOS game have 100% access to the entire hardware of the PC, the only way to ensure 100% compatibility is by emulating the entire PC. That is simply too slow in most situation, and would defeat the purpose of the NTVDM. If you want a PC emulator, I suggest you install a third party product instead.
|
|
Lionel Fouillen
Gamorrean
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 08, 2003 18:01 Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Mattias Welander]Run this at the command prompt (on the CD):
install -xq
where q is the drive letter for your CD.
[/quote]
Unfortunately it didn't work, but thanks for your suggestion. I think I will leave this for later spare time, for I have work for all evenings this week...
|
|
Nottheking
Kell Dragon
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 08, 2003 18:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Mattias Welander wrote:
But first a definition: there is no DOS prompt in Windows NT. There is the command prompt, which gives you the ability to interpret batch commands. There is also the NTVDM (the NT Virtual DOS Machine), which can emulate parts of the hardware/software architecture commonly used by DOS programs. These two systems aren't really related (you can run DOS programms without the command prompt, and the command prompt itself isn't actually a DOS program). In the following discussion, I will sometimes assume your reference to "DOS" is to the command prompt, and sometimes to the NTVDM, depending on the situation.
Sorry about my phrasing... I meant to refer to the "command prompt". Is NTVDM standard to all NT systems, including XP Home Edition? Or is it a seperate component that is added onto the system? Since I use WinME for my home computer, I wouldn't truly know, since both compnents seemingly are simingly combined into one on Win9x platforms, perhaps because they still run under DOS.
Mattias Welander wrote:
They didn't. On the contrary, the Windows XP NTVDM is significantly more advanced than, say, the Windows NT 4 NTVDM. The same goes for the command prompt.
It was always like then from NT 1? However, my comparison was between the now-eliminated Win9x line, and the now single NT line, which would be the transition most of us non-business users would have made.
Mattias Welander wrote:
Not true. The only purpose of the command prompt is to run batches or batch commands. The main purpose of the NTVDM is to run business applications that have not yet been ported to Windows. Official support for running games through the NTVDM was only added at a later stage, as a bonus. It is highly unlikely that someone would have bought a DOS game but never a DOS based OS.
Sorry, I forgot about that. I figured that most business programs would have been ported already, or at least have a more advanced version that used Windows.
Also, it somewhat annoys me that it seems that the entire market that Microsoft caters to are businesses. I know that they have, by far, the majority of the money that MS could make, but many of us would be happier to pay for Windows were it a version that was geared toward home uses, and not so much for business network stations and servers.
Mattias Welander wrote:
Since there never has been a fully functional DOS emulator in NT, they could not have left it fully functional.
Remember that the first NT-based system that I have used extensively is 2000. The NT emulator does seem to be less capable than the 9x emulator, but that ay be due to the fact that 9x runs under DOS. However, I will correct my phrase, and say that the real meaning was an emulator that could create a full virtual environment that DOS programs could recognise as their traditional environment. In other words, total control over sufficient memory (around 32-64 MB), temporary total control of sound devices, and other devices that may be used by DOS programs.
Mattias Welander wrote:
The keyword here is "like". Yes, they could have implemented emulation services that would have allowed DF to run without a hitch in the NTVDM. However, that would most likely have stopped other games from running. Since a DOS game have 100% access to the entire hardware of the PC, the only way to ensure 100% compatibility is by emulating the entire PC. That is simply too slow in most situation, and would defeat the purpose of the NTVDM. If you want a PC emulator, I suggest you install a third party product instead.
What do you mean by "emulating the entire PC"? Creating a full environment inside the normal system? I don't think that that is too slow, especially considering that fact that programs that would require such a thing (like games) are unlikely to be multi-tasked, and could therefore run with a large percentage of the system's total power and resources.
Of course, I do understand the solution is a third-party emulator, but I was wondering why Microsoft hadn't included such a complete emulator themselves. Now I realize that the reason is that their intended audience had no use of such a thing.
_________________
Wake up, George Lucas... The Matrix has you.. |
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 08, 2003 19:28 Post subject: |
|
|
Nottheking wrote:
Is NTVDM standard to all NT systems, including XP Home Edition? Or is it a seperate component that is added onto the system?
Yes, the NTVDM is a Windows NT standard, at least since NT 3.5. I never ran NT 3.1, so I'm not sure if it existed there... I don't think it did, but I don't know for sure.
Nottheking wrote:
I wouldn't truly know, since both compnents seemingly are simingly combined into one on Win9x platforms, perhaps because they still run under DOS.
The NTVDM does not exist on Win9x platforms. Instead, you have DOS, and the command prompt (which in this case is a DOS program, unlike in NT where it is a Win32 program). DOS is completely unrelated to NTVDM, even though they both provide some services with similar purposes.
Nottheking wrote:
It was always like then from NT 1?
See my first answer in this post. Note also that the first NT version was 3.1, not 1.0.
Nottheking wrote:
However, my comparison was between the now-eliminated Win9x line, and the now single NT line, which would be the transition most of us non-business users would have made.
I can understand that might seem slightly confusing for people who waited until XP to switch to NT. I switched completely to NT during NT 4.0 (though I started using it earlier), so for me that simply hasn't been an issue.
Nottheking wrote:
Also, it somewhat annoys me that it seems that the entire market that Microsoft caters to are businesses.
I can understand that. It's a fundamental flaw in the capitalistic system. However, MS do indeed provide a home user version of XP (not that I'd recommend that one for serious use, but still...). Furthermore, the game restrictions for NT only apply to DOS games or incorrectly written Win9x games. For true Win32 games, Windows NT provide with 2000 or XP the best gaming environment ever on a PC.
Nottheking wrote:
...an emulator that could create a full virtual environment that DOS programs could recognise as their traditional environment. In other words, total control over sufficient memory (around 32-64 MB), temporary total control of sound devices, and other devices that may be used by DOS programs.
That's a PC emulator. If such behaviour really is needed, you can either buy MS Virtual PC, or use a third party or free alternative. Remember that very few people will have any use for such a subsystem, and since a full emulator is a quite complicated system (and thus expensive), it makes little sense for MS to add that functionality to every copy of Windows. Instead, they sell it as a separate package.
Nottheking wrote:
What do you mean by "emulating the entire PC"? Creating a full environment inside the normal system? I don't think that that is too slow...
With "emulating the entire PC", I mean emulating the CPU, the memory, the graphics card, the sound card, and any other hardware needed for compatibility with all imaginable games from the DOS era. I've run DF through Virtual PC, and it's rather slow - barely playable on my 1.7 GHz. Remember that since the games are running in a different processor mode than Windows, most every instruction has to be emulated. If it's too slow, well, that's a matter of taste. I would encourage you to download a free PC emulator like Bochs and try it to see if it's fast enough for you. I hope it will be, becase other than the speed, it's a very good solution.
Nottheking wrote:
I was wondering why Microsoft hadn't included such a complete emulator themselves.
See my answer two questions above.
|
|
Patrick Haslow
Trandoshan
Joined: 25 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 09, 2003 04:15 Post subject: |
|
|
Hijackers.
|
|
Sheldon
Gamorrean
Joined: 03 Dec 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 09, 2003 12:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Lionell! I do hope you finish Archangel 3. I loved the first two and played them over and over. 
But I don't understand how so many people devote so much time to getting Dark Forces to run on a new PC. Why not just keep your old PC? Does it take up so much space than having 2 PC's in the house or apartment is not feasible?
|
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 10, 2003 05:36 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, running Dark Forces only on a PC isn't that fun. You want additional software, for example for level editing, and then it gets impractical to use an old PC for it. Don't forget that Dark Forces is so much more than just a game.
|
|
Lionel Fouillen
Gamorrean
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 10, 2003 10:36 Post subject: |
|
|
I only have one PC. Make 2 partitions to allow an older version of Windows? No way! I need the full disk space for my Windows XP digital video editing.
And, during the first quarter of 2004, I hope I can afford buying a Mac with their new 10.3 operating system. Maybe an 17"-iMac. And perhaps an iPod as well.
|
|
Nottheking
Kell Dragon
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 10, 2003 17:59 Post subject: |
|
|
I would reccomend building a whole computer designed purely for such older applications. Here's what I might suggest:Pentium I/II/III/AMD K5/K6 at 200-500Mhz
64MB Memory
A 2-20 GB HD
A CD-RW drive
A 3D accelerator card w/4 MB memory (mabye)
Windows ME, or 98, or 95, in that order. Such a setup would allow you to use many modern applications, while allowing for flawless use of DF applications. I would know; my system is is only better than the one mentioned above in terms of 3D cards (Radeon 7000), and Memory (192MB). I can play UT averaging 20-30 fps, and play DF without any sound problems at all. An added benefit is that my computer boots in <30 seconds!
_________________
Wake up, George Lucas... The Matrix has you.. |
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
|
Nottheking
Kell Dragon
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 11, 2003 21:59 Post subject: |
|
|
Mattias Welander wrote:
Sorry, but the tools I use for DF editing have a lot higher requirements than that. Windows NT is an absolute requirement - running application software on 9x is, well, unacceptable. Furthermore, the tools require DX9 graphics. And finally, many of the editing support algorithms I work with take quite a lot of CPU power.
::Shrugs::
Well, that's what I use for editing... then again, I don't use Dark 3D. 
What I DO use in the DF department are:Dark Forces
WDFUSE 2.1
Notepad
MS Paint
ACDsee I do most calculations in my head, and occasionally use the calculator included with Windows for larger equations. Any other programs forgot to include are equally mundane.
I understand that such a setup would NEVER do for you, as you are also making use of, and creating, FAR more potent tools than are availible today. I was just suggesting that as sufficient for playing and editing DF as we do today. Once you release those programs you're working on, I'll be changing my list to incorporate those.
On a side note, the MS website says that DX9 can be run on 98/ME. However, NT 4 isn't listed; that may have caused confusion for you.
_________________
Wake up, George Lucas... The Matrix has you.. |
|
Nottheking
Kell Dragon
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
|
Patrick Haslow
Trandoshan
Joined: 25 Sep 2003
|
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
|
Matt H
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 24 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 12, 2003 13:30 Post subject: |
|
|
Unless you want custom GMIDs to to work (since those don't usually work right on the Mac.) But the resolution is certainly better on the Mac. It depends on what's more important to you.
|
|
Mattias Welander
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 12, 2003 14:44 Post subject: |
|
|
True... and if you have a good General MIDI emulator on a PC, the music will sound a lot better there than on the Mac, too. Hm. Difficult choice. Good thing I have booth a Mac and a bunch of PCs, then.
|
|
Nottheking
Kell Dragon
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
|
Patrick Haslow
Trandoshan
Joined: 25 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 13, 2003 20:24 Post subject: |
|
|
Matt takes it personally because he creates custom GMIDs!
I would say that 99% of add-on DF levels have no custom music, but over 50% do have custom textures, so there is a much greater cumulative benefit to playing DF at higher resolutions. Sometimes I cry myself to sleep after seeing my custom textures on the PC.
|
|
|
