rec.autos.simulators

Similarly I could say that "disable all the textures and run it in the
lowest resolution for Hornet Korea", or "Use the minimum detail
graphics for F1RS". But people don't want to hear such advices.

If you are trying to imply MS will break the backwards compatibility,
deliberately or not, the history is not on your side. I have installed
DX5, and I can still run practically any previous Win game great on my
system, be it DX3, DX2, DX1 or even WinG (which run even in Win3.x).
And lo and behold, DOS games too, even without exiting Windows like
with previous Windows versions! So it seems MS has in fact improved the
backwards compatibility across different Win-versions.

The only backwards compatibility that eventually might and will suffer
in the distant future is MS-DOS games, so I guess that is another good
reason to not to buy new DOS games anymore. ;^) But I believe even the
Win-version five years from now will offer some kind of option for
MS-DOS, like a separate FAT16 partition and boot like in NT4, but
hardly anyone will want to run DOS games in five years. Maybe the same
people who still believe in Amiga.

Were you referring to N1 or N2? I assumed N1, because N2 absolutely
flies on "top machines" concurrent with its release.

---Jim

I'm not e***d about it, just pointing out a fact.

The fact is, all those controlers work perfectly under MS-DOS, and are
flaky only under Win95. Probably a timing issue, most likely due to
that scheduler that's running in the background.

Sure it's a joke, it's no news that we need a new joystick-input
standard (e.g., perhaps USB). But the point is DOS software can make
all controllers work correctly despite their limitations, Win95
cannot.

Huh? DirectInput doesn't change your hardware. It just does a poorer
job of reading it than DOS software. Hardly seems "fortunate" that you
have to buy all new peripherals to make them work properly in Win95.
Besides, two-thirds of the analog peripherals I use - steering
wheel/pedals and rudder controls - are not even available in digital
versions, even if I did want to waste $400 replacing them. That means
getting "shake free" wheel/rudder input in Win95 isn't even
*possible*, let alone "fortunate".

Joe

Joe

With current machines (P133+) this extra load is insignificant, causing
like 1 fps slowdown. Whoopee! And sometimes the Win95 versions of games
(like Quake, Wing Commander 4, Ignition and UAE Amiga emulator) are
even faster than their MS-DOS counterparts.

Or maybe not, considering controller problems in MS-DOS games are
daily. Screamer Rally is a recent example, it fails to work even with
normal 2 axis analog joysticks, let alone some T2.

DirectInput already does damn good job with a SINGLE joystick port on a
regular sound card. For example: eight buttons, throttle, rudder, eight
way hat, all this without any restrictions at all.

Is that why such MS-DOS game like Screamer Rally forces people to play
it with a keyboard? A driving game? I have seen much more DOS
controller failures so far.

It certainly does change the way that single joystick port on my sound
card can (not "must") be utilized. Much more efficient than the MS-DOS
controllers with their button restrictions (CH Flightstick Pro is
especially so poor in this), big latency, vibration when you are not
even touching the joystick etc.

DirectInput is technically quite superior to any controller support we
have seen in MS-DOS games to date. Show me one MS-DOS game or
controller, where you can use a 2 axis analog joystick, rudder,
throttle, eight buttons and EIGHT way hat, *** all simultaneously
without any restrictions whatsoever, using only _one_ normal SB16 game
port ***. DirectInput has handled that for quite some time already, and
has less latency and better accuracy than any MS-DOS controller in any
MS-DOS game too.

Too bad you have bought peripherals which are not supported by the
hardware manufacturer. I see the mere way these older MS-DOS
controllers work as a hardware defect.

<stuff snipped>

Joe, I am curious, Does NT allow true Multiple-Threads? (unlike Win95
which just makes it *look* like it is multi-threading) If so, NT may
be
actually better for *** than Win95. I use OS/2, it has true multi-
threading and when something is running in the background (print,
download, floppy access, or any combo of the above) there is not
any degrading of system performance, unless I have several (more than
30) applications open and the swapfile is being utilized.
There have been a few games written for OS/2 that use DIVE(direct
video,
similar to Direct Draw for Win95) and there is no slow down of the
system. Also the programmers can use a separate thread for the AI
stuff so it doesn't interfere with the other aspects of game play.
Just wondering, you talk as if you may know or be interested enough
to find out.
Thanks,
Ralph Williams

No it doesn't - only if you through away all your old peripherals and
buy new, digital ones. It does not do a good job with ordinary input
devices at all.

That;s Win95 you're talking about - and since the "flaky shakies" are
in the low-level Win95 device code, there's nothing any game developer
can do to fix it.

Sorry, the facts demonstrate that the complete opposite is true.

Fact1: In *some* DOS games, there are device reading problems on some
systems.

Fact2: In *ALL* Win95 games, there are device reading problems on many
systems.

Obviously Microsoft does as well - perhaps that's why they refuse to
fix the horrendous input-device code in Win95, in an attempt to make
everyone buy their own digital joysticks. But no matter how you slice
it, there's no way that can be defined as an advantage for consumers,
however beneficial it might be to Microsoft's bottom line.

Also, why did you ignore the point that there are no digital rudders
or wheels available, that can get rid of the shakes in Win95? What you
describe as a "hardware defect" is still the defacto hardware standard
for 95% or all input devices, a standard that Microsoft has done a
piss-poor job of supporting.

Joe

Joe

--

Neil Yeatman          
Ajax, Ontario, CANADA

% Well i hope people don't get too sentimental for Win_9? either because it's
% soon gonna die the same ugly death DOS is going through. Bill has seen your
% future and it is NT.

And from all I've seen and heard, NT is in fact a good solid OS.  (can't
really be Microsoft, can it? <G>)
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
     Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./.  [-  < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=