Making a DOSBox-like replacement is feasible to some degree but having actual architecture independence would require emulating the CPU which adds extra layers of complexity and increases hardware requirements. Legacy games will always be subject to compatibility changes between versions because they don't use these new APIs. I was specifically meaning DirectX 10+ games. So there is definately a need for a dosbox like wrapper here. And even then you are still stuck with Windows and x86, no ability to move platform. Even ignoring driver issues there are countless cases of Windows 95/98 games not working (or being difficult to get working and buggy) under Windows 7/8. Certainly more realistic than DOSBox.Īrkose: Unfortunately 'should' doesn't always work. But, it would be the most likely option for such a machine. Unfortunately, the progress on that is glacially slow. I forgot that MS dropped DOS from NT that soon, but, that was never really used outside of corporate offices, so it's not an important detail. This could be bundled in, but the performance hit gets a lot bigger with newer more complicated hardware. Lastly Wine doesn't emulate the hardware, so you need a VM (like dosbox has) if you want to pretend to run old hardware. NT3.5 was the first release to drop MSDOS (and thus the first release of NT, the number was so you could compare it with Win3.1). Windows 2000 and XP are Windows NT (5.0 and 5.1). _Bruce_: NT != MSDOS, that is the difference. There is also no Windows port for Wine, but as Wine gets better and Windows 8/9 gets less compatible, Wine for Windows makes a lot of sense. Wine is the closest we have to Dosbox for Windows, but it has the above problems (on top of more complex compatibility). Windows has a registry and lots of tools, services and libraries which need to be not just present, but configured and altered depending on the situation. MSDOS has almost no environment, you just have some files and you run one. The big problem wtih dosbox for windows is the environment. The last version of Windows to even have DOS at all was Win ME, or whatever NT 4, can't remember which one was last to receive an update. And the newer you go the less benefit you'd receive. There would be some time savings, but not much. Hedwards: Windows has, very, very little in common with DOS.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |