doom compatibility with windows xp

[elbryan42]

ok, just picked up windows xp. i can live without most of my dos games, like duke 3d, blood, and daggerfall (it'll take some getting used to), but i can't live without doom!

my question is, how does the windows ports (zdoom especially) work with win xp? does the sound and stuff work? any crashing? your thoughts?

[Zaldron]

Everything works fine for me. Use the compatibility wizard if you're having problems. Make those programs run at Win9x level.

[nxn]

if you just picked it up why not install and check yourself? If you don't like it you can alweys uninstall it, right?

[Sephiroth]

why then hell did u pick up XP, why not stick with win98se for its DOS. IF XP is worth the heavy price i might, keyword might, buy it. however windows98 se is mostlikly the last windows for me. windows is just too expensive, more so than many hardware components, i dont want to pay 200 dollars for the full windows pack. also why the hell would u pay that for a damn spread sheet app too, damn there are so many good freeware spread sheet with other shit too

[oRaptoRo]

XP fucking owns, tks

[nxn]

Just because you can't pay the price doesn't make the software worse then it is. For some people money isn't an object and they want the best they can get regardless of the price. It's like telling John Carmack he shouldn't get a Bentley just because it costs too much.

[Sephiroth]

i not saying that i will not buy it because of the price, just that i will pay if it is worth it. a few minor bug fixes and extra programs(windowsME) is not worth 200 for the whole deal. however if it has many new bug fixes, tons of new useable features, not lame extra BS, and better use of resources then i may get it and it would be worth the money. also dont be fooled my a graphical update, meaning pretty graphics nothing more, that is AOL's mistake and windowsME. Havent got to see XP yet so i am curious

[Lüt]

It's like telling John Carmack he shouldn't get a Bentley just because it costs too much.

Well, he shouldn't.

[Opulent]

This topic has been buzzing around for awhile...
I wish we knew once and for all the exact compatibility of Doom(the real game, not a port) on XP.
If not, then I have to hold onto 98 and all this legacy hardware... =/
Elbryan: Zdoom1.17c was the last 16-bit version(dos). the rest are 32-bit.(in other words, they should work fine)
Fraggle: dos isn't buggy or unstable. Microsoft just didn't want to support 16-bit apps through the API and the chip. For most people, this is a good thing. I fear, that for a real Doomer, this is unfortunate...
What I don't understand is why they didn't just move to 64-bit OS with IPV6 support? more money by 2005, I guess.

[Arioch]

This topic has been buzzing around for awhile...
I wish we knew once and for all the exact compatibility of Doom(the real game, not a port) on XP.

Sound's broken. Somebody (else) needs to verify that it's broken on soundcards other than sb live (which is utter crap).

If not, then I have to hold onto 98 and all this legacy hardware... =/

Your choice, your loss.

Elbryan: Zdoom1.17c was the last 16-bit version(dos). the rest are 32-bit.(in other words, they should work fine)

I can assure you that the latest versions of ZDoom, JDoom, Legacy, PRBoom, all work just fine in Windows XP.

Fraggle: dos isn't buggy or unstable. Microsoft just didn't want to support 16-bit apps through the API and the chip. For most people, this is a good thing. I fear, that for a real Doomer, this is unfortunate...

I suppose you're suppressing the awful memories.

What I don't understand is why they didn't just move to 64-bit OS with IPV6 support? more money by 2005, I guess.

They intend to release an ia64 build of Windows XP some time in the near future.

Now look at the statistics again and tell me how many people actually have access to IPv6, and how many of those people are the geek types that use a *NIX variant. Until a greater portion of the infrastructure can support IPv6, until the standards and the code support for even the infrastructure is hammered down more solidly, any support by a commercial entity with a RELEASED product is premature.

I would note that the issue of Bluetooth came up during XP development. Microsoft declined to include Bluetooth support into the release code of XP, due to the utter lack of support elsewhere in the industry. However, they've turned that position around with the latest development cycle of Windows CE, after months of outside development work and release of actual Bluetooth-compliant devices, and have actually gotten CE Bluetooth-approved. The XP patch is probably not far behind on that one.

[Drakker]

A simple solution would be to get XP with a brand new puter (if you can afford XP you can buy a new puter) and stick with your current puter for 98SE and dos, or if you have an old 200-400 mhz or so puter stick with it for 98 and doom and use your XP puter for everything else. Beside, XP is unusable if you have anything slower than a 600 mhz CPU (XP on a puter slower than 600 mhz is like 95 on a 486).

Though, I would strongly recommend Windows 2000 over XP, its faster, much more stable and isnt full of bloatware. Check http://firingsquad.gamers.com/ for some reliable benchmarks. It doesnt have the compatibility option, but I can live without it.

On a sidenote, I use Windows 2000 to run windows only stuff and Linux with yadex for editing and everything else (the only editor I've found that works with Win2k is wadauthor and its not that stable on win2k, wadauthor sucks anyway), I would recommend this setting for anyone thats not too lazy.

[Arioch]

Beside, XP is unusable if you have anything slower than a 600 mhz CPU (XP on a puter slower than 600 mhz is like 95 on a 486).

On the other hand I've heard of good results from installations on P2 300's. YMMV?

XP goes fast enough on this computer that I really can't imagine it getting that much slower on a 600MHz ... certainly not as slow as Win95 on 486.

[Zaldron]

Arioch's right. I'm using it on a P2 400 and it's way beyond W98's performance.

Sure, you might need to turn off some graphical effects if the video card's crap, but it looks way better and behaves faster. It's a win-win situation.

[dr_st]

Dual-booting between WinXP and Win98 seems the optimal solution for a user who enjoys oldies, but likes to follow technology as well.

[Sephiroth]

yea but then u better have oine hell of a hard drive. personal i might get XP but only when i build a new system. Compadiblility is not a big thing for me, hey got 2 other systems for older games, but performence is. Also running win95 on a 486 is not bad, but my 486 is more like a hybrid of pentium and 486 technology. The 486 i have acts like a pentium many times and even runs pentium based programs. It is overclocked to 80mhz but still it runs like a 133. I have tried tombradier on a 486dx/88(intel) and it ran like shit, but on this 486 it runs like it did on a pentium system. Also quake runs well on it, but i never tired it on a normal 486 system. The CPU is a cyrix, mostlikly it is a pentium clone with a 486 name so that it would appear cyrix made better 486 cpu's

[deep]

XP is unusable if you have anything slower than a 600 mhz CPU (XP on a puter slower than 600 mhz is like 95 on a 486).

Just make sure you have at least 128mb memory (as with 2k) or better yet 256. But that's peanuts in todays market. Hardly any different than Win2k (as your own reference shows - does win2k require a 600+?).

Though, I would strongly recommend Windows 2000 over XP, its faster, much more stable

2k has a lot of newer hardware compatibility issues, plays fewer games and about the same in stability. Bloatware is one of those "shouts" in the dark - not a meaningful criticism.

The link given does not back up the speed statement. There was some variation but overall I'd agree with "The differences between the various OSs are almost negligible. A difference of one hundred points in 3DMark is pretty much meaningless, as the error margin of 3DMark is around fifty points." Same applies (more or less) to the other tests.

And their FINAL verdict was :

"After running these tests, and assuming that these benchmarks provide a decent estimate of what to expect, we can conclude that XP does not pose a performance risk. Most of the scores were either on par with Win2K or better than it. Win98SE took some leads in a few of the tests, but stability on that OS is something that is left to be desired"

Remember, there are OTHER benchmarks to consider. PC Mag and PC world has slightly different ideas on this subject. There is something in XP that influences integer math (via my own benchmark pgm - some bg task) - I have no idea what it is.

It was more interesting to see the Athlon vs P4 comparisons:)

(the only editor I've found that works with Win2k is wadauthor and its not that stable on win2k, wadauthor sucks anyway)

Not so. DeePsea runs on NT and XP as should -most- pure Windows programs. DoomEd, for example, works fine. DoomCad does not - an old VBx quirky thing, but the latest Wintex does!

[Drakker]

I would never use Win2k on anything slower than a 500. As for ram, of course ou need at least 256 megs, a serious gamer cant live without that anyway. (I have 384).

Of course the perception of unusable varies from one person to another. You can say that 98SE is perfectly usable on a p133, but personnaly, I think its not recommended for puters slower than ~300 mhz. I like my stuff fast and cant bear to wait for windows to actualy do its job and draw windows cuz its busy doing other unimportant stuff. Beside, 400 mhz puters with 256 megs of ram are not that common (they shipped with 32-64 back then...).

My experience with 2k has been pretty positive so far (that was unexpected cuz it was very negative with any flavor of 9x or NT). As for XP, who needs all the bloat and all the crap microsoft has added in it when you could use less-bloated Win2k and not beign subject to that microsoft activation crap? (and all the trackers in it...). I haven't had any problem playing recent games with 2k either. Most of the doom ports work perfectly too. Performances are actualy better than 98 in some games.

Not beign able to uninstall all the XP bloat Microsoft has added is very annoying. It also has been proven many time that the integrated firewalls blocks only what it wants to block.

XP has its compatibility issues too, peripherals not supported, 2k drivers that wont work with XP, etc. Of course Microsoft scores a point with its backward compatibility for a few old programs, but I can run them on another computer that is XP free, so why care? I say buy 2k, its cheaper right now and much more reliable, and it WILL benefit from XP support as almost every drivers for XP are released for 2k too. Wait till XP has got is 12 service packs and Microsoft to get sued a couple of times. Maybe then it will be usable and at an affordable price. Especialy when you pay with Canadian or Australian dollars. (400-500(can)-500-600$(auss) for Windows XP? I can get an Athlon XP 1500 and a GeForce 3 and more for that price).

DeepSea is yuck too. I should have said none of the free and good editors work with Win2k/XP. Deth, DCK, WinDeu comes to mind.

[deep]

DeepSea is yuck too. I should have said none of the free and good editors work with Win2k/XP. Deth, DCK, WinDeu comes to mind.

You should have said that you didn't actually check out the facts. Figures since none of the "facts" you stated were true before (you didn't even read your own link reference to realize it disagreed with you).

DCK never worked in Win9X - no surprise here - this is OLD news.

All of the following work in XP:

WinDeu
Wintex
DeePsea
WA
Deth

All checked and verified by yours truly. There goes your credibility:)

[deadnail]

I'd just like to take this moment to say that WinXP fucking rocks, it beats the living dogshit out of 98SE, I'm on a P3 450 with 256 Ram and I actually think my 'puter is running a bit faster.

I went ahead and formatted my drives into NTFS so I probably have zero chance of getting anything pure DOS to function at all, right? Oh well, PRBoom still rolls along beautifully. =)

[SirRobin]

I would never use Win2k on anything slower than a 500. As for ram, of course ou need at least 256 megs, a serious gamer cant live without that anyway. (I have 384).

I have 32. I run Win95... And old and un-updated version. It's one of the most stable non-nt windows running computers I've seen... I might not be able to play any new games with my P200MMX but I would be carefull in not calling me a serious gamer. I also make music with my computer ;)

[Arioch]

http://www.ipv6.org/impl/windows.html

[deadnail]

http://www.ipv6.org/impl/windows.html

Dumbass is right.

[Psyonisis]

Windows XP is good and all... but it's pointless to buy it right now, especially since nothing really uses it yet. Wait till they come out with a second release service pack thing or something.

[Lüt]

but it's pointless to buy it right now, especially since nothing really uses it yet.

Heh, everybody should know by now to wait AT LEAST 6 months before getting the newest Microsoft OS.

[kristus]

Bentleys suck.

[nxn]

It's like telling John Carmack he shouldn't get a Bentley just because it costs too much.

Well, he shouldn't.

yes you're right, but not because they cost too much, but because:

Bentleys suck.

=]