Or "upcoming Windows OS".
Changed.
EDIT: Though not by me. WTF? Suffer, you sneaky bastard.
Changed.
EDIT: Though not by me. WTF? Suffer, you sneaky bastard.
Fallout (2) works on Vista
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
Suffer likes editing!
S
Stag
Guest
SuAside said:
Just kidding around there, SuAside.
Actaly, Vista was built, then scaped, then built again, then scraped again, and then the whole project we re-started under a new team. That's why it's taken so long between OS releases for Microsoft to get this close to a Vista release. If you think the Vista Kernel is going to be better a lot better than the XP kernel, you're sadly mistaken. There's nothing new in it worth having.Sander said:
Go on: Name one thing that hasn't been dropped from Vista that you really would really want.
dx10 & improved networking capabilities ?TheSarge said:
for the rest, i'll have to see it when it comes out... kinda skeptical about the rest.
It's been scrapped once, because it had gotten bloatware-like. It was rebuilt, as I said, from the ground up.TheSarge said:
Which is why it is better than XP.
Security, stability, decent design, better UI.
Because, simply put, they added an abstraction layer, seperated almost all programs from the kernel (unlike now), improving stability and security by a great deal.
Choreography
Choreography
When Win 98 SE was in step with it's era of hardware and drivers, it was obvious that ME caused as many problems as it proclaimed to cure.
There were enough teething issues with XP, and Service Pack 1, one was nostalgic for Win 98 SE.
This trial and error grinding must have sold quite a few boxes and OEM's of 2000.
During this period of flux and flotsam, I moved to Mac's for my daily computer uses. PC's became the game machine.
My memory for the post publication development for XP is fuzzy.
How many years before Service Pack 2?
By then the drivers and hardware seemed in step with the OS. The two bargain systems I assembled went together with out a hitch. My ego would like to strut, bluff, and misdirect my memory from the hours lost to incompatible firmware and software during the previous years. Maybe my hard knocks educated choices were in sync. More likely this was a happy-happy-happy time when all the components were dancing to the same tune as the software.
So, with new hardware looming on our horizon, bold new opportunities await, for each PC part stepping on another firmware's toes.
And, Microsoft's OS pissing on the wreckage, ...., because it can.
Or, it doesn't know any better.
When looking into Vista, could, should, would I wait a year, two, or three?
If bleeding edge hardware is not presently a hook in my testicles, why could, should, would I not try out the dual core Intel Mac's ability to boot Win OS's?
4too
Choreography
When Win 98 SE was in step with it's era of hardware and drivers, it was obvious that ME caused as many problems as it proclaimed to cure.
There were enough teething issues with XP, and Service Pack 1, one was nostalgic for Win 98 SE.
This trial and error grinding must have sold quite a few boxes and OEM's of 2000.
During this period of flux and flotsam, I moved to Mac's for my daily computer uses. PC's became the game machine.
My memory for the post publication development for XP is fuzzy.
How many years before Service Pack 2?
By then the drivers and hardware seemed in step with the OS. The two bargain systems I assembled went together with out a hitch. My ego would like to strut, bluff, and misdirect my memory from the hours lost to incompatible firmware and software during the previous years. Maybe my hard knocks educated choices were in sync. More likely this was a happy-happy-happy time when all the components were dancing to the same tune as the software.
So, with new hardware looming on our horizon, bold new opportunities await, for each PC part stepping on another firmware's toes.
And, Microsoft's OS pissing on the wreckage, ...., because it can.
Or, it doesn't know any better.
When looking into Vista, could, should, would I wait a year, two, or three?
If bleeding edge hardware is not presently a hook in my testicles, why could, should, would I not try out the dual core Intel Mac's ability to boot Win OS's?
4too
scatman839
First time out of the vault
Now, i'm very sure I already played Fallout 2 on XP, though a while ago.
It was fallout one that I had the problem with, the installer refused to run, but i'll go check both right now.
Well, the installer for 1 had some slight problems starting up.
The game works fine, wonderful, though I doubt my other boxed copy would work, as this was the one that had the problem in XP.
It was fallout one that I had the problem with, the installer refused to run, but i'll go check both right now.
Well, the installer for 1 had some slight problems starting up.
The game works fine, wonderful, though I doubt my other boxed copy would work, as this was the one that had the problem in XP.
Yes, it's very well-known that problems with Fallout and Fallout 2 are erratic and unpredictable. Some people do have problems, others don't, and the type of problems varies as well.scatman839 said:
For as far as I know, no-one has yet been able to isolate what causes any of the problems, except that it only happens with XP.
I seemed to have some problems with my first Fallout 1 (could run on both Win95 and DOS) but not with the Fallout 1 found in the Fallout Tactics bundle (no DOS binaries... and yes I tried to find them) So it's very release specific. But Fallout is runnable on WinXP (all versions) if you have instalations problems literaly copy the CD to your HD and change the compatibility options in the properties of your setup.exe
It's unlikely that it's just release specific, I've had problems with the same release on different PCs with XP, for instance.Makdaam said:
Also, thanks for telling us, but yeah, we know how to fix (most of) those problems. We have an entire forum filled with these technical problems and their solutions.