looks like Parhelia's a no-no for me!

[Pace]

Strahd: When the Parhelia 3 is out, I expect I will be running Longhorn - to take advantage of it. But I still hope it will have Win2000 drivers, as the NT kernel will remain

However, just doing some though, and I would still like to see some sort of a display driver for Win9x. While it has been pretty redundant any time I've multi booted it, I'd still expect to get better than VGA graphics out of it. D3D/OGL would be nice too, but I'd much rather they spent all their time maintaining their Win2000 drivers.

P.

[Tomasz]

Two more reasons to run Win98se:
Adobe Printgear based printers (e.g. NEC Superscript 870) have shitty emulation mode drivers in WinXP.
Dungeon Keeper II has garbled sound and poor stability in WinXP.

[Strahd]

Originally posted by Pace
Strahd: When the Parhelia 3 is out, I expect I will be running Longhorn - to take advantage of it. But I still hope it will have Win2000 drivers, as the NT kernel will remain

However, just doing some though, and I would still like to see some sort of a display driver for Win9x. While it has been pretty redundant any time I've multi booted it, I'd still expect to get better than VGA graphics out of it. D3D/OGL would be nice too, but I'd much rather they spent all their time maintaining their Win2000 drivers.

P.

I would understand dropping it if they had a version of Parhelia that did a form of video capture. But a simple display driver that would still allow gaming in a Windows 98 environment would be appreciated by many.


Remove the Multidesk crap, E Dual Head desktop schemes and all that other useless shit and come out with one driver to support 98. If there are any bugs, then upgrade your OS if you don't like it.

[rylan]

Yeah, I find it pretty darned odd that Matrox will waste time writing a driver for NT4 and not put one out for Win98/ME. NT4 is a piece of crap, and most people using that switched to win2k, which also sucks, but anyway... A lot of peoples' option is using 98SE or messing with winXP to try to get it to work correctly.. and I got some other hardware that doesn't have XP drivers.. Bleh.. sucks that M$ is supporting 98 for another year, but Matrox isn't

[Wombat]

NT4 is <B>not</B> a piece of crap, and it's fairly laughable that you're proclaiming the virtues of Win9x over it.

NT4 is actually one of MS's better pieces of work (relative to other MS products).

[Marshmallowman]

NT4 is a good work OS, stable, but very little support for games. but enough to almost get me to move from win98 when it first came out.
I started using win2k since the RC1, it is the most stable/usable MS OS ever.(well ultra stable since since SP1)

matrox support their old hardware with new OS's (consumer video capture NOT included),I have a winxp dreiver for my ol milenium!.

but the decision to not support a retiring OS on there latest hardware, I think is a reasonable decision. We are getting regular driver updates and good active development. Writing driver for an OS that is going to fade away over in the next two years would be a HUGE waste of resources.

We do have quite a few machines here at work that run win98, but these will never be a candidate to recieve a parhelia, they will just sit there until they die, at which point they will be replaced by win2k machines.

Win 98 is for runing old hardware that can't run fast enough on win2k and above.
If you are running win98 on new hardware you should at least try running win2k.
(win2k runs GTA3 a lot faster if you run it in win98 compatibility mode )

[KvHagedorn]

Originally posted by Strahd


Or until a video card manufacturer decides it won't write drivers and therefore forces you to change.

Then maybe you'll see where Ribbitt is coming from.

Oh, I absolutely see where he's coming from, and I did not realize he used Linux most of the time when I said that. What I was saying was that his excuses for not switching were rather lame, as I and most others have found W2k to be a big improvement over W9x. If he had said what he really meant, which was "I only use Microsoft anything to play games, and I'll be damned if I give them more money when Win98 works fine for that." I wouldn't have said anything.

[Ribbit]

Originally posted by KvHagedorn


If he had said what he really meant, which was "I only use Microsoft anything to play games, and I'll be damned if I give them more money when Win98 works fine for that."

I went and wrote those big posts back there to state my position, and then you go and say it all so much better in one sentence.

Although it's not really about the money...

[Pace]

Originally posted by rylan
Yeah, I find it pretty darned odd that Matrox will waste time writing a driver for NT4 and not put one out for Win98/ME. NT4 is a piece of crap, and most people using that switched to win2k, which also sucks, but anyway... A lot of peoples' option is using 98SE or messing with winXP to try to get it to work correctly.. and I got some other hardware that doesn't have XP drivers.. Bleh.. sucks that M$ is supporting 98 for another year, but Matrox isn't

Hehe. As Wombat said, NT4 is pretty good, just doesn't do much with latest hardware. It's the only real OS Microsoft have made without any real bloat (unless you wanna include NT3.x).

Win2k sucks...? Hmm...

Or was your post just sarcasm?

P.

[VJ]

Anyone here thought of using vmware

http://www.vmware.com

for running old dos games ? This allows you to simply run an entire computer with the OS you choose within your Windows XP. Sure, there is some loss in performance, but given the computing power of the current crop of PC's, I doubt you'll notice it on the DOS-games.
(I'm trying to get this to work, but apparently VMWare has a problem with DR-DOS, so now I'm searching for my old Dos 6.22 disks).

Jörg