Does SEIV run on XP????

[kerensky]

I am thinking about *possibly* upgrading to win xp and am wondering if there are any known issues.

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by kerensky:
I am thinking about *possibly* upgrading to win xp and am wondering if there are any known issues. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I have never had any problems running SEIV on XP. I run it both at home and here at work and I never even had a single bug come up to work out.

In fact, I have never run SEIV on anything but XP. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[dogscoff]

yup, I've had it running fine on xp home and pro.

[Fyron]

Originally posted by kerensky:
I am thinking about *possibly* upgrading to win xp and am wondering if there are any known issues. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I recommend upgrading to win 2000. XP is crap and not worth the money. It is win 2000 + garbage + BS + crappy interface + bloatware - several good layers of computer maintenance organization schemes - user restriction settings other than admin or totally restricted. All for a lot more money than you could get 2000 for these days...

[Raging Deadstar]

Same here. I've ran SEIV And Starfury on XP With no problems at all since august. The only errors encountered are when the game just freezes up occasionally (typical windows though)

[pathfinder]

Run SEIV on XP with no problems.

[mottlee]

I had it on the system at work the only issue I had was it ran slow

[Mephisto]

I tend to disagree with Fyron if he talks about the professional Version which is quite a nice piece of work IMHO. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[se5a]

oh my ........

*shakes head*
what happend to the KISS prinicple??

and XP pro rocks.
there is verry little I cant run on this. the only times I have had problems are when the installer desides that it doesent like the os, but you can usualy get around that by using the compatabilty modes. hell, I have run old DOS games under XP pro (with dos box so it probibly dont count)
ill admit, I havent used 2000. and many of the annoying interfaces can be changed to the classic Versions.

[Karibu]

But wait until Windows Longhorn is here. See if your (okay, mine too) petty calculators can run that OS http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Longhorm requirements (http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,1581842,00.asp)

[Solymr]

I'm not a big fan of 2000 myself. I have 98SE, 2000 Pro and XP Pro on this machine and I tend to use XP the most, 98SE sometimes for my old favs but I haven't actually used 2000 since I updated it Last, which was back in Feb. I find its pretty unstable with several games and I've had a few others that just refuse to run under it. I've NEVER had a problem with XP, with the possible exception that I hate having to restart and go into 98 so I can play a DOS game when I'm bored (I'm too lazy to bother with dosbox). This isn't to say 2000 is bad, I'm sure its great to use in buisness. I just find that when it comes to games 2000 just can't keep up the pace and the handful of my friends who've tried it tend to agree with me.

Also, programs like StyleXP can change the look of the interface and the stupid new start menu is easily set back to classic mode.

All in all, SE4 is fine on XP. I've had a problem with ship animations, but I think thats just a rare bug that only a few people have had.

And no, I'm not a M$ sales rep. I just find that XP Pro is hardly given the credit it deserves. Its a solid gaming platform that until Longhorn comes out, or Linux attracts more game creators, will be what most games will be aimed at.

Just my 2 credits worth.

[JayBdey]

Trust me, you won’t want longhorn. XP is the Last MS product I will be using. If the rumors and speculations are even half true you will no longer own your computer with longhorn. You will be allowed to do only what MS approves. Only "trusted" programs that are signed will run on it, so good bye OSS for Windows, do you think they will sign Mozilla's code as "safe"?

And you will get a good laugh out of this. Look at the projected system averages for when longhorn comes out. MS says this will be the average PC when it ships.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/04/2223237&mode=thread&tid=137&tid=185&tid=190&tid=201

From Slashdot "At first I thought this was a joke, but this article from Microsoft Watch confirms it: 'Microsoft is expected to recommend that the 'average' Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.'"

[Solymr]

Originally posted by JayBdey:
Trust me, you won’t want longhorn. XP is the Last MS product I will be using. If the rumors and speculations are even half true you will no longer own your computer with longhorn. You will be allowed to do only what MS approves. Only "trusted" programs that are signed will run on it, so good bye OSS for Windows, do you think they will sign Mozilla's code as "safe"?

And you will get a good laugh out of this. Look at the projected system averages for when longhorn comes out. MS says this will be the average PC when it ships.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/04/2223237&mode=thread&tid=137&tid=185&tid=190&tid=201

From Slashdot "At first I thought this was a joke, but this article from Microsoft Watch confirms it: 'Microsoft is expected to recommend that the 'average' Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.'" <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't intend on using Longhorn myself, I'm hoping Linux will be a more viable platform by then. I'm not fond of being told what programs I can and can't use (as I'm sure most others are) so I seriously doubt Longhorn will take off with gamers unless M$ changes its strategy (highly unlikely, looks like Big Bill wants to hold our hands and show us the golden path he has in store for us).

In regards to recommended system specs, I'm guessing Longhorn won't be out till late 06 or ealry 07. By then the average PC will make my machine look like a pocket calculator. But as many have said before, Longhorn will probably work on any new machine you buy today, just not running its full features.

I just hope Linux starts to get popular with game developers.

[Atrocities]

I have been running SEIV on XP for over a year and a half now and it has ran fine. No problems.

[Fyron]

I have been able to run a wide variety of games without issue on 2000, with the exception of a small number of ancient DOS games, which can be run in other ways, so no loss there. 2000 is just as stable as, if not more stable than, XP, because there is less bloat. The core OS is pretty much the same with both OS. 2000, with service packs installed, is perfectly fine for gaming.

There are several interface areas that you can NOT revert to normal in XP, which is a big problem.

Mephisto, XP Pro is a decent OS, though it pales in comparison to 2000, as it has all that garbage floating around that you don't need stacked on top of win 2000, which it is mostly a skin upgrade of anyways...

[Magnum357]

I think I agree with others, this new "Longhorn" OS is a load of crap!!! I'm sick and tired of M$ trying too control the entire computing world. I think Win98 and WinXP are going too be the Last OS I'm going too use because Linux is starting too look more and more popular by the minute.

Heck, my brother just got a copy of Linspire (its actually Lindows, but because of all the Lawsuits by M$ claiming too steal the "copyrighted" name of Windows, they changed it too Linspire) and I'm really impressed by this OS. Its not nearly as Open sourced as Red Hat and other Linux OS's, but its based on a Hierarchy structure like Windows and it can still run many older Windows based programs that are common on Win98/2000 (maybe even XP based too).

Its very possible many small game developers could look into Linspire as a good, solid Gaming OS. Heck, I heard SEIV was made with Delphi (and awsome programming language), maybe Aaron Hall could create His Space Empires games on Linsprie. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[JayBdey]

What areas can you not change back to normal on XP? You can change most everything in XP, some things are not easy to change, but they still can be changed.

And I actually like the blue XP GUI. I like it better than the cold grey 9x/2000 look, but MS included that as the Win Classic theme for people who like it more.

[se5a]

Originally posted by Solymr:
I hate having to restart and go into 98 so I can play a DOS game when I'm bored (I'm too lazy to bother with dosbox). <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">get one of the dosbox front ends, its great, it will help you set up all the stuff for a game then you can run it.
next time you just need to run the front end, click the game and hit run - easy as pie.


oh - and incase you guys didnt realise, that comment about the KISS principle was pointed at the longhorn specs...

[Will]

For those who do not like the WinXP cartoon-y Fisher Price Interface, and don't want to spend all the time tracking down the options to switch the interface to something resembling intelligence...

Perhaps you should look into replacing Explorer (the Windows shell shipped with Windows) with GeoShell (http://www.geoshell.com/index.asp) or LiteStep (http://www.litestep.net/). Can be as bare-bones or fully featured as you want with various plugins, and there are many, many pre-made themes which combine the plugins with a useful interface.

I'm currently using LiteStep with the Austerity theme, slightly modified to have four virtual desktops, among other things.

[Atrocities]

Hey Magnum posted. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I know him from the old SE4 Forums. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Hey Magnum. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[Raging Deadstar]

Originally posted by Will:
For those who do not like the WinXP cartoon-y Fisher Price Interface, and don't want to spend all the time tracking down the options to switch the interface to something resembling intelligence...

Perhaps you should look into replacing Explorer (the Windows shell shipped with Windows) with GeoShell (http://www.geoshell.com/index.asp) or LiteStep (http://www.litestep.net/). Can be as bare-bones or fully featured as you want with various plugins, and there are many, many pre-made themes which combine the plugins with a useful interface.

I'm currently using LiteStep with the Austerity theme, slightly modified to have four virtual desktops, among other things. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree, currently i'm using a program called Windowsblinds and have a very nice gold Lord of the Ringstheme on xp, very pretty http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
2000 is just as stable as, if not more stable than, XP, because there is less bloat. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I disagree there. I have never had an XP Pro machine lock up and give me the BSOD, or any other form of crashing. With W2K I had it happen at least every couple months if not more, and this was with all the latest drivers and not running any programs that would cause such an event.

[Magnum357]

Yo Atrocities, its been a while. I've hardly had time too come too the SEIV message Boards, been very busy.

Anyway, I'm seriously going too look into this Linspire program. I think it has potential.

[Fyron]

Originally posted by Ragnarok:
I disagree there. I have never had an XP Pro machine lock up and give me the BSOD, or any other form of crashing. With W2K I had it happen at least every couple months if not more, and this was with all the latest drivers and not running any programs that would cause such an event. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You were unlucky then. I have had XP crash more times than 2000... Also, the BSOD does NOT appear in XP, because they designed the OS to do a reset instead of display the error screen, as a crappy marketing ploy. I believe there is a way to fix this crappy behavior so that you can know what the cause of the crash was, but it is a pain...

Originally posted by JayBdey:
What areas can you not change back to normal on XP? You can change most everything in XP, some things are not easy to change, but they still can be changed.<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't recall all of them, but there are a lot of things that require hacking the OS to change, such as the loading screens, the logging off screens, the user control panel screens, and some others that I do not recall... the "Classic" interface only goes so far...

I agree, currently i'm using a program called Windowsblinds and have a very nice gold Lord of the Ringstheme on xp, very pretty <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You can use such things on win 2000 as well... as well as the explorer shell replacements Will mentioned.

[ May 17, 2004, 17:41: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Mephisto]

I have run both W2k and XP Pro and XP. XP is just better equipped for its time as could be expected since W2k is the older one. From the point of gaming I never had any significant problems with both OS so XP is somewhat better at handling DOS. Are you sure that XP does not display BSOD?

[Fyron]

If you look closely, you will see it appear for half a second or so, however long it takes the OS to decide to reboot to hide the BSOD. But, you should never see an unmodified install of XP just display a BSOD and stop. It should always reboot, rather than show you the error so that you can have a chance to correct the problem. Marketing ploy, nothing more.

The few devices that the 2000 CD does not have drivers for can be gotten from the internet in seconds, minutes if you do not have broadband. The advantage of being newer is null.

[ May 17, 2004, 22:02: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Renegade 13]

XP has never restarted on me instead of giving me the BSOD. Also, I'd never thought about it, but I've never seen the BSOD at all in XP. Personally, I don't think the UI is so bad, but then again, I'm not a programmer, or have a massive knowledge of computers, so....that might have something to do with it.

[JayBdey]

Imperator, an XP programmer could look at some of those error Messages and scratch his head in confusion, they don't help anyone. Rebooting is better. And I've never heard anyone 'market' that setting of XP.

Login screens are easily changed, boot up screens are easily changed, and several screens in XP have no real equivalent in 2000 so how else would they look? You have no argument there.

[Fyron]

Hacking the operating system or shelling out money to leech companies is not what I would qualify as "easily changed".

All of the screens I referenced _do_ have a 2000 equivalent... what new screens are you refering to, exactly? Other than the "fast user switching" interface, which could very easily have been made to look like the "classic" windows interface when using it, but was not, what screens are you refering to exactly?

About the BSOD and crashing... I never said that all error Messages were intrinsically helpful. But, you can write it down and look on the net to see if there is something you can do to prevent that crash in the future. No info at all is no good. And yes, not showing the BSOD was a marketing ploy, part of the stability of XP. BSOD was something windows critics often complained of, so they hid it. Marketing ploys are not always things directly advertised... marketing is far more complex than just bluntly claiming things.

I indeed have an argument, which you have failed to inhibit in any way.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I indeed have an argument, which you have failed to inhibit in any way. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Oh no! Stop right there everyone! This will not become another "them against IF" thread. Some people like XP, others don't, we will all live with it, ok?

[dogscoff]

I remember a time when vehement "my OS is better than yours" squabbles were actually about two different OSes from different manufacturers (Windows Vs Mac (back when Mac wasn't oiwned by MS), windows vs unix, Amiga vs PC, Amiga vs atari, C64 vs Speccy etc).

What has the world come to when all we have left to argue about is which Version of bloody Microsoft's bloated Orwellian crappy excuse for an operating system is marginally preferable to which other?

Maybe I should borrow the Time-travelling gearbox so I can go live perpetually in some other decade.

[kerensky]

Whoa!!!! This thread took off since Last time I checked on it. YOu guys have done away with most of my fears of switching to XP. Most of the fears originated from teh upgradingmof the video computer at my church. We started with XP home, then the next level (whatever it was), to finally end up with a new computer and XP pro.
I am a little iffy about converting because I run 2000 pro and like it. However, there are several games that don't work with it, like the Sims (hopefully you guys do realize there are games other than SEIV)

[Fyron]

Do you have all of the updates for 2000 installed?

[EaX]

The BSOD appear in XP and W2K but the default configuration of windows is to reboot the system when one of this errors happens, this can be changed from the control panel->System-> Advanced ->StartUp and recovery (i don't know if this is the name because i use w2k in spanish, i think it's something like Startup and recovery, anyway there's only 3 options http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ), and as far as i know in XP is the same.

[Fyron]

Hmm... maybe they added the auto-reboot in service pack 4 of 2000. I have never observed it to auto-reboot after a BSOD.

[JayBdey]

And I've never observed a BSOD (or reboot from error) on XP OR 2000 at all.

[Fyron]

That is fine. It does not mean that they do not happen. How long do you typically leave such systems running before shutting down/rebooting?

[JayBdey]

This system (XP Pro) has been on for the Last 2 weeks and it's still as stable as when it is first rebooted.

[Fyron]

2 weeks is not much.

I never saw XP Pro Last longer than 2000 before becoming unstable and needing to be rebooted.

The hardware you are running is also a big factor in how often Windows crashes. This is why some people almost never saw crashes when running Windows 98, whereas others saw crashes every day...

[ May 20, 2004, 00:00: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Kamog]

I have never seen a BSOD on XP but it does occasionally freeze up and I have to reboot.

[dogscoff]

(hopefully you guys do realize there are games other than SEIV)
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well sure we do. I mean there was SEIII, and before that there was SEII.

And I have something called tetris on my mobile phone, but I can't work out how to colonise all these funny shaped planets that keep appearing.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Oh, no, the funny shapes aren't planets, their building blocks for a colony. See, the people your building for like holes everywhere, so you always gotta leave holes or a row gets deleted. When you get to the top, you win.

[Magnum357]

Hey, I never really said I didn't like Windows XP, I'm just saying that I prefer Win98 and Win2000 better. The only thing I was complaining about is this new "Longhorn" OS M$ is trying too spit out. I always here the argument that you need too go along with M$ with its product updates because the older OS's will become obsolete and everyone else is using new OS's, so basically you are forced too follow the leader.

But the bad thing about this new OS "Longhorn" (more like Mad-cow) is that the entire OS is going too run through DirectX which mean that all the little fancy windows and applications will run through DirectX. Which means that new Computer systems are going too have too rely on hefty video cards that take up a lot of power compared too PC's today. I've heard a "Longhorn" system could consume over twice the power this way and for buisnesses that is bad news. Why do you think buisnesses love Durons and Celerons, because they run at low power and do not require a hefty graphics card too run an OS or games with. All I can say is if M$ is forcing this new OS onto people too sell their product and force more powerful PCs, they better make the PCs more energy effeicent because buisnesses just can't afford too take it in the @ss in power consumption.

I'm sorry, but XP is going too be the Last M$ OS I'm going too used. I'm very curious about this new OS "Linspire" and if it can run most of my older Win98 games on it, I will be happy.

http://linspire.com

[Fyron]

More and more business go Linux every day anyways... nothing beats cost efficiency like free. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

[ May 20, 2004, 17:40: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Magnum357]

True, that is why Red Hat and other Linux OS's are being used greatly by buisnesses now. But I'm just saying that this Linspire OS could be great for small developers like Aaron Hall with his Space Empires game, or the other Shrapnel Game developers that build games for content and not fancy graphics.

I wonder if SEIV could work on Linspire?

[ May 21, 2004, 02:26: Message edited by: Magnum357 ]

[Phoenix-D]

Magnum..Durons aren't used for lower power consumption. They're used because they are -cheap-. And certain next gen video cards not withstanding, most more powerful video cards don't much more power than weaker ones.

[Magnum357]

Strange, I swear I did an entire paper in college on the topic of "differences between processors" and I kept running into example where Celerons where made too be more energy effecient then Pentiuams, while the Durons are AMD's equivlent too the Celeron. I would have too look up the data, but both Celerons and Durons with their motherBoards, both only consumed on average of 60% of the power that a Pentium or AMD processor. Maybe my data was faulty, but I swear I did a good job on the research. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

As for the Vid cards consuming more power, I'm not a real expert when it comes too hefty 3D cards, but I thought that some of these new, powerful cards these days can really suck a lot of volt juice when installed. I've heard a few cards on the market taking up too 50% of the entire computers power consumption. If this is true, I'm just saying Longhorn could make PC's real "Power hogs" for buisness.

[Kamog]

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
Oh, no, the funny shapes aren't planets, their building blocks for a colony. See, the people your building for like holes everywhere, so you always gotta leave holes or a row gets deleted. When you get to the top, you win. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Oh, I've been doing it wrong all this time. The more I practiced, the longer it took for me to win; somehow I got worse and worse. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

Edit:
Another fun game: Minesweeper. Click on the unexplored sectors in the quadrant to explore the galaxy and find planets to colonize. The star date is displayed in red in the upper right. The numbers you see in the map squares are how many ships you have in the sector. If you're lucky, by moving your ships you'll colonize a breathable home world (a black spikey planet with a red background), and you can get additional colonies, too. (black spikey planets with gray backgrounds). See how fast you can conquer the whole quadrant! Once you've colonized all the black planets, you win.

[ May 21, 2004, 06:06: Message edited by: Kamog ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

ooh, I've been doing that one wrong all along too!

[Mephisto]

That is somewhat shortsighted if you have to warrant for the software as a business company. Linux is great for the average consumer but it has its problems when you want to use it in a company-to-company environment.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
More and more business go Linux every day anyways... nothing beats cost efficiency like free. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by Mephisto:
That is somewhat shortsighted if you have to warrant for the software as a business company. Linux is great for the average consumer but it has its problems when you want to use it in a company-to-company environment.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Really? I always thought it the other way around.
or it might depend on how you are thinking of it being used. Everything has its pros and cons but I think in general Windows is still best for the desktop machines. And Linux is better for the networking or server apps. Especially if its going to be any company-to-company link.
(and MAC is the best webserver)

[Fyron]

Originally posted by Mephisto:
That is somewhat shortsighted if you have to warrant for the software as a business company. Linux is great for the average consumer but it has its problems when you want to use it in a company-to-company environment. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Such as?

[Mephisto]

If you as a company give/sell Linux to another company/consumer, you have to warrant for it. If Linux is violating IP-Rights (possible risk: SCO vs. the World) you have to indemnify you partner when he cannot use Linux any more or has to pay for it. Can you imagine how much money that is when you have supplied a large consumer like a bank with Linux and their whole production is on a standstill for one or two days?
You have to provide patches for problems with Linux ASAP, i.e. you cannot wait until the community has fixed the problem. You even cannot wait if the community is working on the problem because if not you have lost several days and you partner could hold you responsible for any damage resulting from it. So you have to have some Linux programmers to fix the problems on standby. If, on the other hand, you buy the software yourself from a partner such as Microsoft and a problem with their software arises you will give the OS seller hell to fix it for your customer. And yes, even Microsoft bows to this.
Oh, another problem with open source software for a company is of course the GNU/GPL. First you have to make your work on the product open source itself which means you have to provide your work the customer paid for to gain a business advantage to his market opponents as well (your customer is not delighted about that) and you cannot impose most of the warrant limitations in the GPL to your customers because they violate national law. Oh, if you use Linux in a confidential government environment you are in for another problem: Try to preserve your NDA and to make your confidential government work open source at the same time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Phoenix-D]

Originally posted by Magnum357:
[QB] Strange, I swear I did an entire paper in college on the topic of "differences between processors" and I kept running into example where Celerons where made too be more energy effecient then Pentiuams<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The only difference between a Celeron and a Pentium is that the Celeron lacks some of the onboard memory.

Video cards are a different matter; they do draw somewhat more power -but- they're limited by the AGP bus, which can't deliver anything close to 60% of the powerput of a normal power supply. If no CDs, disk drives, or the latter are running, THEN it might take that much power, but not before.

[parabolize]

Originally posted by Mephisto:
If you as a company give/sell Linux to another company/consumer, you have to warrant for it. If Linux is violating IP-Rights (possible risk: SCO vs. the World) you have to indemnify you partner when he cannot use Linux any more or has to pay for it. Can you imagine how much money that is when you have supplied a large consumer like a bank with Linux and their whole production is on a standstill for one or two days?
You have to provide patches for problems with Linux ASAP, i.e. you cannot wait until the community has fixed the problem. You even cannot wait if the community is working on the problem because if not you have lost several days and you partner could hold you responsible for any damage resulting from it. So you have to have some Linux programmers to fix the problems on standby. If, on the other hand, you buy the software yourself from a partner such as Microsoft and a problem with their software arises you will give the OS seller hell to fix it for your customer. And yes, even Microsoft bows to this.
Oh, another problem with open source software for a company is of course the GNU/GPL. First you have to make your work on the product open source itself which means you have to provide your work the customer paid for to gain a business advantage to his market opponents as well (your customer is not delighted about that) and you cannot impose most of the warrant limitations in the GPL to your customers because they violate national law. Oh, if you use Linux in a confidential government environment you are in for another problem: Try to preserve your NDA and to make your confidential government work open source at the same time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Linux does not have to be GNU/GPL. The programs made for Linux don't have to be GNU/GPL. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Fyron]

Mephisto, you do not have to release ANY code you write under GPL/GNU to be able to use it with or on Linux. All you can not do is claim that actual Linux code is yours. But everything you write can be as closed source as you want it to be.

The case with SCO is a sham.

If Microsoft was so responsive to customers complaining about bugs, why are there still dozens of unpatched security exploits in their software? Surely large companies have complained about them by now.

[Atrocities]

I dream of the day that I can buy a MS product and it be complete, solid, bullet proof, and well MS proof.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by Atrocities:
I dream of the day that I can buy a MS product and it be complete, solid, bullet proof, and well MS proof. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Part of the impossibility of that is the popularity of it. The more people who have it, the more people there will be chipping away at it, which will always exceed the number of programmers trying to protect it.

[Magnum357]

True, but maybe their wouldn't be so many people "chipping away at it" if M$ would just stop trying too be the Evil Empire of the Computer world (you hear the Drum role of Star Wars Music as Darth Vader/Bill Gates enters the room).

Seriously though, why does Bill Gates have too rule the entire Computer world? Isn't part of what makes our contry great in the United States is the limitation of Monopolies?

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by Magnum357:
Seriously though, why does Bill Gates have too rule the entire Computer world? Isn't part of what makes our contry great in the United States is the limitation of Monopolies? <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Like anyone else who feels that their way is best. We should be glad he didnt start a cult (or did he?)

I guess the new social rule is that politics, religion, and operating system are not topics for polite company. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ May 24, 2004, 15:11: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

[Mephisto]

I did not say that you had to release Linux source code. But under the GPL/GNU you have to release the source code of programs you base on open source software itself under the GPL/GNU. You can not make it closed code.
The case with SCO may be a sham but oif your company stands in the line with millions and billions of dollars you might have another few on the issue but to take any risks. Trust me on this one, I work for one of the biggest computer companies on this planet as a lawyer.
And the point is not how fast Microsoft will fix a bug but that they have the money to compensate you and your customer if they screw up big times. If you screw up your customer with open source software you have no one ti mitigate the damage. See my point?

[Fyron]

You only have to release the code of the parts that are open sourced. You can still keep parts of programs entirely written by you closed source.

[Mephisto]

No, you can not. If you base your work on a piece of software that it GPL/GNU you have to release everything you base on this code to the public as well.

Please note: I'm talking about source code, not about work you create with a GPL/GNU piece of software (like a picture with an OS graphic program). You don't have to make the resulting work of an OS product OS, that's correct.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
You only have to release the code of the parts that are open sourced. You can still keep parts of programs entirely written by you closed source. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

[Gandalf Parker]

Keep in mind that even with the open source, it does not mean you cant charge for it. Some are making a good buisness out of selling GNU/GPL projects. Here is a good link discussing that with the subject of GIMP http://www.gimp.org/about/selling.html

[ May 25, 2004, 14:42: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

[Mephisto]

Charging for it works on the mass market quite fine but not if you produce a piece of software for your customer alone (like a piece of finance software for a bank). Your customer wants to have this software so he is ahead of his competitors and he demands all IP rights of this work so only he can use it and decide what to do with it. And that you cannot do with software based on a GPL/GNU license as you have to make the software OS too. The demans of the OS and your customer are head on in this one.

Having said this, just to be clear, I'm a fan of the OS idead and OSS software. I just want to point out that there are some finer points to closed and open software in a business environment to be considered.

[Fyron]

If you write your own software designed to be used on Linux, you do not have to make it open sourced. Look at Quake 3 for an example. You think they are going to release the source code for that game? Not likely. If you write software that consists primarily of open source code but with a few modifications, that is when you have to release it with GPL/GNU. But you can just as well write closed source software designed to run on Linux as you can on Windows. It is not as if you have the source code to use on Windows when writing software for it.

[Mephisto]

Mmm, maybe I'm not that clear in what I want to say. There are two things I talk about here - Linux and OSS under the GPL/GNU.

What you have to do if you take a GPL/GNU OSS as a base from where you start programming I said in several Posts already. You have to make it OSS as well.

If you use Linux and sell it to customers you have to give them a warranty that the software has a) no issues and b) is free from third party rights on it.
If you find errors or you violate third party rights you have to fix the problem/indemnify your customers. Therefore you have to either invest money or have some programmers to fix problems. In the end you become your own OS seller (like Microsoft).
If you hire Microsoft or Sun directly and there are errors in their software they will fix it for you and your customer. And yes, they really do this because you can easily sue them and win.

You can program software for Linux all day long and keep it closed source. No problem at all. But from a business point of view it is often just more profitable to hire an OS seller and get rid of all you warranty problems or to become a OS seller yourself.

[ May 26, 2004, 05:18: Message edited by: Mephisto ]

[Solymr]

Going back to the previous discussion about product stability and perfection, I doubt most major software products are ever bug free, no matter who the creator is. As for the whole 2K vs. XP debate, I choose XP due to game stability. Anything else doesn't really fuss me, I don't care if 2K can stay stable for longer then 2 weeks without rebooting, I just know that 2K doesn't run the games I like very well and thats what makes me choose what OS I use. If 2K ran games better I know I'd stick by it, but I just feel its better suited for a buisness rather then a gamer like myself.

As for Linux, I'm not that much of a fan myself mostly because of the whole game thing. Yeah its probably overall a better product depending what distro you use, but in the end games decide what I use. Sure, I'd love it if gaming on linux was easier, I'd switch right over.

Sure, some guy can get into my system if he's bored enough and he can look at what sites I go to, the personal information I have on this computer (or lack of) and if he rarely cared to, do something nasty like screw up XP. It just means I have to reinstall my OS and games, but in the end I'd rather be able to use all my games and be at a small risk then feel secure but also not able to run software I've payed good money for.

Just my 2 grand worth.

[Gandalf Parker]

Everything has its Pros and Cons. I love WinXp for my desktop and playing games on. I would use Win2000 or MAC as a single-purpose server for its nice menu admining. I would use unix for stability. I use Linux as my multipurpose server because it will take care of everything and the software plays well together (I dont rely on ISPs for any services).

only old geezers need to read this
By the way one of the things that linux does excell is "emulators". They have one for nearly every console or old computer system people remember fondly so if you ever watned to go back and play your commodore, trs80, amiga games then look into pulling that old computer out of the closet and loading linux on it. Thats another big point for linux, being able to get a free software and turn the old computer into a server or router or firewall.

[ June 01, 2004, 15:51: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

[David E. Gervais]

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
only old geezers need to read this
By the way one of the things that linux does excell is "emulators". They have one for nearly every console or old computer system people remember fondly so if you ever watned to go back and play your commodore, trs80, amiga games then look into pulling that old computer out of the closet and loading linux on it. Thats another big point for linux, being able to get a free software and turn the old computer into a server or router or firewall. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thanks alot Gandalf, now my eyes are glazed over and I'm caught in a retro daydream... Star Raiders, Pac Man, Miner2049'er, Loadrunner, David's Midnight Magic, M.U.L.E., etc, etc, etc,.. Atari 800 with 16k RAM and a 410 program recorder whooohooo! I soon upgraded to 48k with a Targa 32k RAM board..... then I got my Supra 300 baud modem with outragously high phone bills attached, aaaaaah, the good old days.

..David! wake up!

wha? where? why? Oh, I'm still typing on the forums,.. oops sorry. (your fault Gandalf)

Thanks, I always love a good walk down memory lane. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Cheers! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ June 01, 2004, 17:52: Message edited by: David E. Gervais ]

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by David E. Gervais:
M.U.L.E., etc, etc, etc,..<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You know that Im obligated to mention now that Shrapnel sells "Space HoRSE" which is a new M.U.L.E.
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/gilligames/Space_HoRSE/1.htm

[Mephisto]

I can proudly say I was 1 of the 100 something official buyers of M.U.L.E in Germany. A shame for such a great game that so few bought it, isn't it? And the real shame is that Danny Bunton (spelling?) has died much to early. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[Fyron]

Originally posted by Solymr:
Going back to the previous discussion about product stability and perfection, I doubt most major software products are ever bug free, no matter who the creator is. As for the whole 2K vs. XP debate, I choose XP due to game stability. Anything else doesn't really fuss me, I don't care if 2K can stay stable for longer then 2 weeks without rebooting, I just know that 2K doesn't run the games I like very well and thats what makes me choose what OS I use. If 2K ran games better I know I'd stick by it, but I just feel its better suited for a buisness rather then a gamer like myself. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I have had no more problems with games on 2k than I had on XP. Old games, new games, whichever.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I have had no more problems with games on 2k than I had on XP. Old games, new games, whichever. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">With both I found it handy to have 2 drives. I like to have my C drive NTFS for better OS functioning, and my D drive FAT32 for better handling of older games.

[Thermodyne]

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
With both I found it handy to have 2 drives. I like to have my C drive NTFS for better OS functioning, and my D drive FAT32 for better handling of older games. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Please splan dis to me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Seriously, wouldn’t it be more efficient to just adjust the NTFS permissions for the specific folders used by the games. Keeping in mind that XP handles them differently than 2K.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by Thermodyne:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
With both I found it handy to have 2 drives. I like to have my C drive NTFS for better OS functioning, and my D drive FAT32 for better handling of older games. <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Please splan dis to me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Seriously, wouldn’t it be more efficient to just adjust the NTFS permissions for the specific folders used by the games. Keeping in mind that XP handles them differently than 2K. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I dont know. Ive only looked at NTFS permissions in affecting access and security. I didnt know there were options for file system formats. I know there are settings for things like "run as if Win95" but that only goes so far. With some older games they just hate NTFS.

Can you change the file structure of a folder after an install? That would surprise me. If I have to install it twice then its about the same as what Im using.

[ June 02, 2004, 16:22: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]