re: Would NT4 questions, if any, be on-topic in this forum?
Saturday, May 30, 2009 at 9:32 am
Windows 2000 Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by Kiwi
(2207 messages posted)
I had very good teeth when I started in computing, with Big Iron hardware (very early
IBM 360), and rather poor dentures when I tested the Betas for XP and wasn't well
impressed, with either one (false teeth or WindowsXP).
Before VGA and Super VGA, DOS PCs had terrible game graphics, and everyone who gamed
very much with any desktop PC platform, had either an Atari 800 or a C64 from Commodore.
It was very late in DOS' heyday when EGA was supplanted by VGA. Windows 3.0 got
going just about the same time.
It took the 486s and VGA to make x86 computers game platforms that were worthy of
the name, but we really had little fun setting up various menus for loading multiple
sets of Autoexec / Config files to suit the games of the period. However, it's the
W9X games I am now reprising, and it was Win98 I was complaining about.
I had long since had my rounds with OSR2 (W95's final version) not enabling USB,
nor working properly with a LAN, and gave up on that, but I'd somehow managed to
forget (blame it on age) that WinNT was more primitive than Windows95 had been!
.
Kiwi
**
On Friday, May 29, 2009 at 3:19 pm, Curt R wrote:
> Your mistake is trying to run any games on either NT 4.0 (or earlier) or Windows
>2000. Neither in my experience is any good for gaming. I cut my computing
>teeth in industry on NT 4.0 and ran 2000 for quite some time at home and found that
>neither was worth bothering with from a gaming standpoint. I dual booted fairly
>quickly with 2000 and 98 and used 98 exclusively for gaming. If you really want
>to run an older game on an older PC, install 98 and forget about NT, 2000 and ME.
>
>
>
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 | |  | re: Would NT4 questions, if any, be on-topic in this forum? (Kiwi: Sat, May 30, 2009, 9:32 am) |
| |
| |
Return to the Windows 2000 Discussion Forum
|
|
