Forget DOS.
Nektarios Kalogridis
I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
eventually die. It's about time some demo groups become more open
minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
stuff: dos, dos, dos...
DirectX2 is powerful enough to produce a high quality demo. Having
read some of the arguments presented in this newsgroup against directx2,
I sadly realize that many demo groups will always be doomed under the
shadow of dos...
I am not trying to portray directx2 as a gift from god, but rather
give the message that a change is good.
Honestly speaking, I hate Microsoft, I hate Bill Gates, and I hate
the fact that he controls 90% of the op. sys. market. Nevertheless,
I still think that a demo on windows 95 would be something very
cool.
Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
aside?
One last thing: before saying anything against directx2, please know
the---------------->> Facts.
bye bye.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Nektarios Kalogridis
http://remus.rutgers.edu/~nectario
nect...@remus.rutgers.edu
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
67294:
Nektarios Kalogridis (nect...@remus.rutgers.edu) wrote:
: I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
: minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
: stuff: dos, dos, dos...
I'm getting sick of this American attitude toward demomaking (bear in
mind that's where I am). Many people on this newsgroup seem to overlook
the spirit of the scene and the challenge of taking a system to its
limits, and just sell out to whatever's new and hot. OK, the same could
be said about Pentium coders by 386/486 die hards (like me :), but if
you want to change the way everyone programs, good luck. The DOS PC
scene will always be just that: DOS. Just like the C64 coders (God bless
them :) that still flourish today; they darn well know they don't have the
fastest machine on Earth, but they're used to their system, they've
befriended others who have the same system, and they enjoy making their
system do more and more unbelievable routines.
: Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
: guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
: aside?
The day I have to wait for Win95 to load up before I watch a demo is the
day I get dipped in rubbing alcohol and dragged across a field of thumbtacks.
I'm not against Win95 as an OS for running applications. I just don't think
this demoscene belongs there. If you think different, knock me out and start
a new scene.
--
= Andy Voss (aka Phoenix) - vo...@rpi.edu / pho...@ftp.cdrom.com =
| Kosmic Free Music Foundation - Hornet - Vision - Imphobia - DC5 |
= http://www.rpi.edu/~vossa/ - ftp://ftp.fm.org/pub/music/phoenix =
Michael Anttila
|| I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
|| eventually die. It's about time some demo groups become more open
|| minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
|| stuff: dos, dos, dos...
Please, show us the way...
Yes, I'm serious! You can't just expect to come on here and say "Wake up
to Win95" and expect the whole demoscene to suddenly say "Yes, you're
absolutely right! We've been so wrong all this time! We will immediately
switch to Win95!".
So, YOU make a demo for Win95. When everyone sees how awesome it is, it
will be no time before people will follow you, copy your ideas, and
worship at your feet. I'm serious! The main reason there aren't any
Win95 demos is because nobody has made one yet! Now's your chance to
start something really cool, a part of the demoscene that's all your own!
What, afraid that nobody will follow you? That you'll be outcast from the
scene? Ridiculous. Start your own scene, the Win95 scene! I guarantee
that people will follow you.
|| DirectX2 is powerful enough to produce a high quality demo. Having
|| read some of the arguments presented in this newsgroup against directx2,
Then do it!
|| I sadly realize that many demo groups will always be doomed under the
|| shadow of dos...
Well, then that's their own problem, right? So what, there will be other
groups.
|| I am not trying to portray directx2 as a gift from god, but rather
|| give the message that a change is good.
Then change! Nobody is restricting you from using Win95.
|| Honestly speaking, I hate Microsoft, I hate Bill Gates, and I hate
|| the fact that he controls 90% of the op. sys. market. Nevertheless,
|| I still think that a demo on windows 95 would be something very
|| cool.
So that's why you support him, right? Seriously, a Win95 demo would be
cool. Let's see one from you!
|| Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
|| guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
|| aside?
Why are some of you so fanatically toward Win95? Can't you guys think
logically for a moment by putting any loving feelings aside?
|| One last thing: before saying anything against directx2, please know
|| the---------------->> Facts.
The fact is, my computer's not good enough to run Win95... And even if it
were, I'd wait until NT4 comes out and the OS market settles down again
before I'd even consider changing operating systems.
To all those people complaining because nobody is making demos for their
favourite computers/operating systems, why don't you go make one yourself
instead of wasting your time preaching to people who probably won't even
listen to you? The PC scene came about because people started making
intros and demos for it, not because there was a huge debate about whether
the scene should switch to PC or stay on the Amiga, and the PC side won.
You can't argue a scene into existence, you have to create it.
-PsychoMan
___________________________________________________________
Michael Anttila aka PsychoMan of Craw Productions
2A Pure Math / Computer Science at U. of Waterloo, Canada
E-Mail: mant...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca
Homepage: http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/~manttila/
Craw Productions: cr...@magi.com, http://www.magi.com/~craw/
Fabio Bizzetti
Nektarios Kalogridis (nect...@remus.rutgers.edu) wrote:
>I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
>eventually die. It's about time some demo groups become more open
>minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
>stuff: dos, dos, dos...
>DirectX2 is powerful enough to produce a high quality demo. Having
>read some of the arguments presented in this newsgroup against directx2,
>I sadly realize that many demo groups will always be doomed under the
>shadow of dos...
>I am not trying to portray directx2 as a gift from god, but rather
>give the message that a change is good.
>Honestly speaking, I hate Microsoft, I hate Bill Gates, and I hate
>the fact that he controls 90% of the op. sys. market. Nevertheless,
>I still think that a demo on windows 95 would be something very
>cool.
>Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
>guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
>aside?
>One last thing: before saying anything against directx2, please know
>the---------------->> Facts.
Facts:
WHY should I use a (wannabe or not) multitasking system for my demos/games
when I can get all the machine power going to program it directly, and
exploit the hardware thru VESA/AF (accelerator functions) and (when
available) 3D libraries eventually?
Nothing that Windows95 does can't be done (much better) with dos, and
what is more important, I get the complete control over the machine (with no
overhead even): a thing that Windows' Direct-xxx will never really give.
In substance: why bother with Windows95? What does it give more to demos
and games? Nothing I can consider of value, and the few things it gives
are also buggy and slow.
Program for Windows95: forget clever coding and code only to please Microsoft.
If Microsoft at least made good products, then.. but they even suck, so...
Anyway: wanna make demos for Windows95? Do it.
Dont wanna make demos for Windows95? Dont make them.
I dont see where is the problem, why do you want to take all us by your part?
Let only Bill Gates do it, if he wanna try.. :D
I personally would even avoid to use Dos/BIOS (for the few things it is used),
and code my own OS, but if the most low-level I can go is Dos, then I surely
dont wanna go more high-level with Windows95.
I hope that in comp.sys.ibm.pc.demos there will be no flamewar between Dos
and Windows95 demo coders: live and let live; let's compare the results if
you are not afraid of it. And dont bother about others' choices, think only
about yours.
Gia sou.
>bye bye.
>--
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>Nektarios Kalogridis
>http://remus.rutgers.edu/~nectario
>nect...@remus.rutgers.edu
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
---------------------------------------
Fabio Bizzetti - bizz...@mbox.vol.it
Kim Robert Blix
Nektarios Kalogridis (nect...@remus.rutgers.edu) wrote:
: I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
: eventually die. It's about time some demo groups become more open
: minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
: stuff: dos, dos, dos...
: Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
: guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
: aside?
To make a good demo, you need the COMPLETE controll over the computer.
Windows does not provide that.
And (now im ONLY speaking for myself here) I was born an raised on
test interface, Since dos 3.2, C64 .. I like it .. I *prefer* it.
I hate toi use the mouse, and I hate to look in windows to find stuff.
I cant stand windows for those reasons, and because its slow.
Who are you to say dos will be dead any day now? No mather how DEAD dos
is, WIN 95 IS BASED ON IT. Every thing you do in windows is based on ms-dos
WINDOWS is *not* an operating system, its a 3-rd party interface, for
firm yuppies who only use their computer to write contracts.
Whatever happens, I'll still be using DOS, becuase I *prefer* ms-dos's
interface. (actually I prefer linux, but I *cant* install it, so im stuck
with msdos)..
Norsk / Hoaxer
--
------------- .:::. |
no...@interlink.no E o o 3 - + -
---oOoOo--( )--oOoOo--- |
Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see,
one chants out between two worlds, fire walk with me. -Dave, Twin Peaks.
---------------------
James Rimmer
In article <52bqob$l...@usenet.rpi.edu>, 67294: <vo...@rpi.edu> wrote:
>: Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
>: guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
>day I get dipped in rubbing alcohol and dragged across a field of thumbtacks.
It's not all that much worse than waiting for your BIOS to test
memory, waiting for all the device drivers to load, or waiting for
Linux to boot...it's just a few more seconds while you do something else.
>I'm not against Win95 as an OS for running applications. I just don't think
>this demoscene belongs there. If you think different, knock me out and start
>a new scene.
I'm not going to knock you out, but consider some of the
possibilities--you'll have access to accelerator functions regardless
of what card is in the machine. There won't be any need for someone
to have a SoundBastard-compatible soundcard or a GUS-compatible
wavetable card for sound. We all know the problems virtual device
drivers have, but what about the benefits? Coders and demo fans alike
have been griping for years about trying to support some of the really
advanced functions, and Win '95 allows us to do that.
Just thought I'd throw in a positive angle to using Windows '95 for
demos.
I think we'll see a Windows '95 or Windows NT scene show up soon
enough, if either can prove itself capable of handling truly
high-speed graphics.
Just a thought...any other intelligent ideas?
--
Jimmy Rimmer Rimbo / Hornet ri...@cs.ucsd.edu
| The day I lost my faith was the day I learned that Jefferson owned slaves, |
| the day I learned that "Dixie" was written by a New Yorker |
| and the day that the University of Texas axed Coach Gus. |
Markus Aurala
vo...@rpi.edu (67294:) writes:
>I'm not against Win95 as an OS for running applications. I just don't think
>this demoscene belongs there. If you think different, knock me out and start
>a new scene.
If someone starts to make Win95 demos, I dont have anything against it...
But - please - don't call it 'demoscene'. It would dishonourable.
Matthew J. Doucette
Nektarios Kalogridis wrote:
> I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
> eventually die. It's about time some demo groups become more open
> minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
> stuff: dos, dos, dos...
>
> read some of the arguments presented in this newsgroup against directx2,
> I sadly realize that many demo groups will always be doomed under the
> shadow of dos...
>
> the fact that he controls 90% of the op. sys. market. Nevertheless,
> I still think that a demo on windows 95 would be something very
> cool.
I completely argree with everything you said here.
> Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
> guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
> aside?
What it all comes down to is that a demo in DOS can be faster than a demo in
Windows 95.
Matthew
M.J. Jongerman
Nektarios Kalogridis <nect...@remus.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>DirectX2 is powerful enough to produce a high quality demo.
Ok, prove it... Make a demo in it and show us what it can do, maybe
that 'll convince us ;-)
Sparcus / Nostalgia
Tero Pulkkinen
> To make a good demo, you need the COMPLETE controll over the computer.
> Windows does not provide that.
>
people say there's pmode extenders to do the job, but it'd be certainly better
let some OS handle the pmode part (so that nothing have chance to turn it to
vm86 :))
> Whatever happens, I'll still be using DOS, becuase I *prefer* ms-dos's
> interface. (actually I prefer linux, but I *cant* install it, so im stuck
> with msdos)..
>
I thought democoders should know how to use computer.. :)
(SHOULD, most of them dont know anything...:)
NO decent democoder should say he cant install linux. (There's docs coming
with it, and only thing it takes to install it is to follow the instructions :)
--
-- Tero Pulkkinen -- te...@modeemi.cs.tut.fi --
Nektarios Kalogridis
Michael Anttila wrote:
> So, YOU make a demo for Win95. When everyone sees how awesome it is, it
> will be no time before people will follow you, copy your ideas, and
> worship at your feet. I'm serious! The main reason there aren't any
> Win95 demos is because nobody has made one yet! Now's your chance to
> start something really cool, a part of the demoscene that's all your own!
>
though...
Also, the speed of the demo will vary depending on the graphics card the
system has.
>
>
> The fact is, my computer's not good enough to run Win95... And even if it
> were, I'd wait until NT4 comes out and the OS market settles down again
> before I'd even consider changing operating systems.
Windows NT 4.0 is a bad bet for demos, and games. Why? It emulates the
directx technology.. As a result, things are a lot slower than win95..
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Nektarios Kalogridis
http://remus.rutgers.edu/~nectario
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Murray Stokely
>Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
>guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
>aside?
Windows 95 is an awesome environment for programming dos, you can have
multiple dos windows open, etc.. etc.. but noone wants a demo or game for
Windows95.. sorry thats just how it is, too many disadvantages.. i think more
demos should work in a win95 dos box, instead of forcing you to reboot but
thats about as far as it should go.. the demo scene mirrors the game
development scene.. and vice versa.. when commercial games start selling good
for Windows95 only, then youll see a change.. not until then.. cause the guys
at ID arent stupid, neither are the members of the demo scene..
,s$
-- - -- ---,sSı'"ıSs,-- $$$a'"ıSs,--- --- -
s h i v a n `"ıı¬S#s, $$$$ $$$& b a s t a r d
- -- ----ı$$$$-- $$$ı- ı$$$ -- $$$ı -- -- -
`"ı#,sSı"` `"ı#,sSı"`
Nathaniel Meo
Nektarios Kalogridis <nect...@remus.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
>eventually die. It's about time some demo groups become more open
>minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
>stuff: dos, dos, dos...
No offense here but I don't see DOS comming to a bitter end here.
Caldera is going to be releasing a free version of DOS along with
source code so the inductry can expand on DOS. And if you havn't
noticed, just edit your MSDOS.SYS file for WIN95 and what do you know,
DOS tight there in front of ya.
>DirectX2 is powerful enough to produce a high quality demo. Having
>read some of the arguments presented in this newsgroup against directx2,
>I sadly realize that many demo groups will always be doomed under the
>shadow of dos...
>I am not trying to portray directx2 as a gift from god, but rather
>give the message that a change is good.
Yeah, I do see the benefits of DirectX in that compatibility programs
will be solved, but when you think of the overhead and the CPU time
lost with WIN95's multitasking interface, it's not something to smile
about. Plus, thinking about shelling out $300 dollars for Borland C++
or Visual C++ is something I don't honestly want to do.
>Honestly speaking, I hate Microsoft, I hate Bill Gates, and I hate
>the fact that he controls 90% of the op. sys. market. Nevertheless,
>I still think that a demo on windows 95 would be something very
>cool.
Until I actually see it though, I'm not really going to much care for
it.
>Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
>guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
>aside?
I'm not totally against Windows 95, it is a good OS for the majority
of people who don't know much about computers and has multitasking and
cut and paste features that are also nice, but I do use DOS and Linux
just as much for many other purposes and wouldn't think of trying some
things in WIN95.
Jim Paris
>I'm not going to knock you out, but consider some of the
>possibilities--you'll have access to accelerator functions regardless
>of what card is in the machine. There won't be any need for someone
>to have a SoundBastard-compatible soundcard or a GUS-compatible
>wavetable card for sound. We all know the problems virtual device
>drivers have, but what about the benefits? Coders and demo fans alike
>have been griping for years about trying to support some of the really
>advanced functions, and Win '95 allows us to do that.
I completely support the idea of having a common interface to access all
the functions of the computer, but I _don't_ support using a GUI and
pre-programmed function calls, etc, to write your whole demo. That's why
I support all the new OSes, such as DemOS..
-blackbob [j...@kd3bj.ampr.org]
-http://www.kd3bj.ampr.org/~jim/
Kim Robert Blix
Tero Pulkkinen (p15...@zori.cs.tut.fi) wrote:
: > Whatever happens, I'll still be using DOS, becuase I *prefer* ms-dos's
: > interface. (actually I prefer linux, but I *cant* install it, so im stuck
: > with msdos)..
: >
: I thought democoders should know how to use computer.. :)
: (SHOULD, most of them dont know anything...:)
Hello?? I didnt say I couldnt MANAGE to install it did I? I used to have
it installed, But I have to use ms-dos for other reasons. dont be an ass.
: NO decent democoder should say he cant install linux. (There's docs coming
: with it, and only thing it takes to install it is to follow the instructions :)
Look above.
Mr.P
On Wed, 25 Sep 1996 21:06:43 GMT, Michael Anttila
<mant...@picard.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
>|| I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
>|| eventually die. It's about time some demo groups become more open
>|| minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
>|| stuff: dos, dos, dos...
>Yes, I'm serious! You can't just expect to come on here and say "Wake up
>to Win95" and expect the whole demoscene to suddenly say "Yes, you're
>absolutely right! We've been so wrong all this time! We will immediately
>switch to Win95!".
That's the problem with some people. They expect to be able to
persuade people to do what they want to do. Cult leaders, maybe, but
most of us are happy enough with Watcom C++ 10.6 and PMODE/W.
Of course, most of us aren't immune to it. I clearly remember myself
whining about how pathetic Windows 95 is. Where's the Windows 95
replacement I'm supposed to write? :)
>|| Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
>|| guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
>|| aside?
>Why are some of you so fanatically toward Win95? Can't you guys think
>logically for a moment by putting any loving feelings aside?
Well, after using NT 4, I really can't say too much about Win95 that
is positive. Plug and Play is a real pain for those of us with old
hardware (a 1993-era Sportster 1440)... I spent three hours wrestling
with ICUs and other shit to try to get a simple NE2000 card to be
recognized by Windows 95.
Of course, it's the stepping stone, so...
>|| One last thing: before saying anything against directx2, please know
>|| the---------------->> Facts.
>The fact is, my computer's not good enough to run Win95... And even if it
>were, I'd wait until NT4 comes out and the OS market settles down again
>before I'd even consider changing operating systems.
I have 95 only because it came with my system. Anyway, my biggest
argument against it is that writing for Win95 will force us to raise
the minimum requirements for demos by a large degree. Win95 is
unbearable under 8MB after you begin to run something, and it slows
down pretty quickly under 16MB. I understand that we shouldn't be
running stuff in the background while a demo runs, but isn't a 16MB
minimum system requirement a bit excessive?
(No, I'm running under a 32MB system, so I have no problem there.)
>To all those people complaining because nobody is making demos for their
>favourite computers/operating systems, why don't you go make one yourself
>instead of wasting your time preaching to people who probably won't even
>listen to you? The PC scene came about because people started making
>intros and demos for it, not because there was a huge debate about whether
>the scene should switch to PC or stay on the Amiga, and the PC side won.
>You can't argue a scene into existence, you have to create it.
Hear hear! I think that this part, or at least that last line, should
be added to the FAQ. Trixter?
-----------
Mr.P, m...@spartan.pei.edu
Coder, master procrastinator, and loudmouth.
"In German, a young lady has no sex, while a turnip has."
- Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens), "That Awful German Language"
Markus Aurala
m...@trance.pei.edu (Mr.P) writes:
>>>I'm not against Win95 as an OS for running applications. I just don't think
>>>this demoscene belongs there. If you think different, knock me out and start
>>>a new scene.
>>If someone starts to make Win95 demos, I dont have anything against it...
>>But - please - don't call it 'demoscene'. It would be dishonourable.
>How about adding the prefix "Win95"?
>Ah well, I really don't care... C64, Amiga, PC, BeBox, Java, Win95, or
>even SNES, if it tries to do something considered impossible, it's
>part of the demoscene.
I'd prefer something like 'Win95 multimedia art scene' or something
like that.
--
Markus Aurala
Abduction'9x Main Organizer tai jotain
Mr.P
On Thu, 26 Sep 1996 17:50:49 -0400, Nektarios Kalogridis
<nect...@remus.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> Windows NT 4.0 is a bad bet for demos, and games. Why? It emulates the
>directx technology.. As a result, things are a lot slower than win95..
Huh!?
Ever heard of DirectX2?
Mr.P
On 27 Sep 96 06:13:46 GMT, mau...@niksula.hut.fi (Markus Aurala)
wrote:
Do you consider the...umm.. what's it...forget it..."Win95 demoscene"
offensive? Well, I do too, but I have to get used to it sometime...
(Phrase? clause? hmm...)
Scott Stuart Buchanan
Nektarios Kalogridis (nect...@remus.rutgers.edu) wrote:
: Michael Anttila wrote:
:
: > So, YOU make a demo for Win95. When everyone sees how awesome it is, it
: though...
: Also, the speed of the demo will vary depending on the graphics card the
: system has.
No shit, Sherlock.
Same goes for DOS, Linux, whatever operating system you're running under.
If you can make a demo under Windoze'95 that runs the same speed
regardless of what computer system it is run on (within reason,
obviously), regardless of what "background tasks" there are, keeps the
demo synched perfectly to the music the whole way through, doesn't crash,
and most importantly, is a decent demo, I'll kiss your arse.
But I bet you can't.
It can be done under DOS.
: > The fact is, my computer's not good enough to run Win95... And even if it
: Windows NT 4.0 is a bad bet for demos, and games. Why? It emulates the
: directx technology.. As a result, things are a lot slower than win95..
Windows NT loses a lot of market share due to its slight incompatibilities
with Win'95, and more importantly, its incompatibilities with DOS.
: --
: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
: Nektarios Kalogridis
: http://remus.rutgers.edu/~nectario
: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
.
cya l8r... :
_ __ ____ ___ __ ____ __ __ _ __ ___i__ _ _____ ___ __ ____ _ _
,sS$P!
Scott Buchanan $$$$ : aka Goblin -of-> fORCE & xTAtiC
http://www.cse.unsw.EDU.AU/~s2190983 $$$$ . email: s219...@cse.unsw.EDU.AU
$$$$
,asS$Ssa, $$$$,asS$Ss,
el33t coder of ,$$$P"^"Y$$A, ,asS$Sss,$$$$$$P"^"Y$$A$$$$$$$$$$$ Xtatic's GFX
$$$' `$$$,A$$P"^"Y$$$$$$$' `$$d$$P"' $$$$ and Code man
"fORCEViEW" $$$ g $$$$$$' `$$$$$$ b $$$ z d$$$'
. $$$, ,$$$$$$ o $$$$$$, ,$$$ d$$$' .
: `Y$$Ss,sS$$$$$$$, ,$$$$$$$Ss,sS$$P' d$$$' :
_ __ _i__ __ _`"Y$$$P"$$$$Y$$Ss,sS$$P'__`"Y$$$P"'__ _d$$$'_ __.,i___ __ _ _
!`^"Y$Ss, $$$$ `"Y$$$P"' ,$$$$$$$$$$7'! sig by:
: `Y$$Ss, $$$$ 4$$P""""""' : kRiSiS
. `"$$$$a, ,$$$P . ^fORCE^
`"$$$$$$$$' Brought To You By The Letter "k"
`^""^'
Scratch & Sniff [ ] Smells like glass, doesn't it?
Mr.P
On 27 Sep 1996 23:08:40 GMT, s219...@cse.unsw.edu.au (Scott Stuart
Buchanan) wrote:
>Nektarios Kalogridis (nect...@remus.rutgers.edu) wrote:
>: Michael Anttila wrote:
>: > So, YOU make a demo for Win95. When everyone sees how awesome it is, it
>: Well, that's what I am working on.. Do not expect something soon
>: though...
>: Also, the speed of the demo will vary depending on the graphics card the
>: system has.
>No shit, Sherlock.
>Same goes for DOS, Linux, whatever operating system you're running under.
>If you can make a demo under Windoze'95 that runs the same speed
>regardless of what computer system it is run on (within reason,
>obviously), regardless of what "background tasks" there are, keeps the
>demo synched perfectly to the music the whole way through, doesn't crash,
>and most importantly, is a decent demo, I'll kiss your arse.
Keeping synchronization to music isn't that hard in code, you know.
The tough part is the design of it.
As for the first requirement (runs at the same perceived speed
regardless of what hardware it's running on), that will only be
achieved through 3D accelerator functions. On the other hand, that
would restrict the demo to being either fully 3D or having to ship
with an addon board that does all the calculating.
No, 100% animations don't count..
>But I bet you can't.
>It can be done under DOS.
Well, if you're using standard VGA resolution, that's perfectly
possible. Anything above, and you're looking at an additional
requirement: a VESA-compliant BIOS and/or UniVBE/SDD.
>: > The fact is, my computer's not good enough to run Win95... And even if it
>: Windows NT 4.0 is a bad bet for demos, and games. Why? It emulates the
>: directx technology.. As a result, things are a lot slower than win95..
>Windows NT loses a lot of market share due to its slight incompatibilities
>with Win'95, and more importantly, its incompatibilities with DOS.
That's because Windows NT isn't supposed to be a better Windows 95.
Microsoft intentionally left Plug and Play support and other funny
niceties (which I don't need.. PnP is a pain in the ass for non-PnP
card installation under Win95) out. Under Win95, open a DOS box, and
things that do direct port writes work. Under NT, you get GPFs. The
reasoning is: under NT, we want stability and performance above all.
Under 95, we want compatibility above all.
> _ __ ____ ___ __ ____ __ __ _ __ ___i__ _ _____ ___ __ ____ _ _
> ,sS$P!
> Scott Buchanan $$$$ : aka Goblin -of-> fORCE & xTAtiC
<ZAP>
Umm, please change the signature.. it's sort of long.
Einar Ingebrigtsen
> Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
> guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
> aside?
I for one agree with this, we in Scoop are planning several productions
under Win95/NT. Most of our members has dropped DOS forever, and is only
programming under DirectX2.
Look out in the near future, and there will be some productions for Win95/NT.
---
Einar Ingebrigtsen - Programmer DiMaga Studios
a.k.a. Adept / Scoop
Markus Aurala
piir...@hepo.cc.lut.fi (Antti Piirainen) writes:
>>I'd prefer something like 'Win95 multimedia art scene' or something
>>like that.
>Forget "art", add "multimedia", "internet" and "information superhighway" :)
Or even "object-oriented". :)
--
Markus Aurala
Abduction'9x Main Organizer | http://www.hut.fi/~maurala/
Helsinki University of Technology | markus...@hut.fi
DOT * PIK * SHUT * jne
Kris Buytaert
> >
> I thought democoders should know how to use computer.. :)
> (SHOULD, most of them dont know anything...:)
>
> with it, and only thing it takes to install it is to follow the instructions :)
>
However.. I can imagine one not having enough money to buy some extra
diskspace to install linux.
cya
Kris Buytaert,
aka Sleeping Dog / The Natives
Wired'96 Organiser
http://hagar.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/~sdog
Scott Stuart Buchanan
Mr.P (m...@trance.pei.edu) wrote:
: >: Also, the speed of the demo will vary depending on the graphics card the
: >: system has.
: >No shit, Sherlock.
: >Same goes for DOS, Linux, whatever operating system you're running under.
: >If you can make a demo under Windoze'95 that runs the same speed
: >regardless of what computer system it is run on (within reason,
: >obviously), regardless of what "background tasks" there are, keeps the
: >demo synched perfectly to the music the whole way through, doesn't crash,
: >and most importantly, is a decent demo, I'll kiss your arse.
: Keeping synchronization to music isn't that hard in code, you know.
: The tough part is the design of it.
Under DOS, yes, under Windoze, I guess it wouldn't be too hard to just
stop/start effects at certain points in the music, but more "advanced"
synchronization, I think would be much harder (e.g. the "woosh"
accompanying the 3d letters racing past in FC's Panic (or was it some
other FC demo)), considering the problems with speed constancy.
: As for the first requirement (runs at the same perceived speed
: regardless of what hardware it's running on), that will only be
: achieved through 3D accelerator functions. On the other hand, that
: would restrict the demo to being either fully 3D or having to ship
: with an addon board that does all the calculating.
: No, 100% animations don't count..
Now, there was a thread in this very newsgroup regarding the way Fashion
runs on the same speed on a 486dx33 up to a Pentium, obviously this CAN be
done under DOS, but I'd _REALLY_ like to see it done under Windoze.
: >: > The fact is, my computer's not good enough to run Win95... And even if it
: >: Windows NT 4.0 is a bad bet for demos, and games. Why? It emulates the
: >: directx technology.. As a result, things are a lot slower than win95..
: >Windows NT loses a lot of market share due to its slight incompatibilities
: >with Win'95, and more importantly, its incompatibilities with DOS.
: That's because Windows NT isn't supposed to be a better Windows 95.
: Microsoft intentionally left Plug and Play support and other funny
: niceties (which I don't need.. PnP is a pain in the ass for non-PnP
: card installation under Win95) out. Under Win95, open a DOS box, and
: things that do direct port writes work. Under NT, you get GPFs. The
: reasoning is: under NT, we want stability and performance above all.
: Under 95, we want compatibility above all.
I'm not disputing this, but, because of this, its not really appropriate
for the "home market". Anyway, I dunno why NT was brought into this.
: > Scott Buchanan $$$$ : aka Goblin -of-> fORCE & xTAtiC
: <ZAP>
: Umm, please change the signature.. it's sort of long.
I'm trying to cut it down (its smaller than it was before), but you'll
have to suffer it once more ;)
.
cya l8r... :
_ __ ____ ___ __ ____ __ __ _ __ ___i__ _ _____ ___ __ ____ _ _
,sS$P!
Scott Buchanan $$$$ : aka Goblin -of-> fORCE & xTAtiC
http://www.cse.unsw.EDU.AU/~s2190983 $$$$ . email: s219...@cse.unsw.EDU.AU
,asS$Ssa, $$$$,asS$Ss,
el33t coder ,$$$P"^"Y$$A, ,asS$Sss,$$$$$$P"^"Y$$A$$$$$$$$$$$7 Xtatic's GFX
of $$$' `$$$,A$$P"^"Y$$$$$$$' `$$d$$P"' $$$$' and Code man
"fORCEViEW" $$$ g $$$$$$' `$$$$$$ b $$$ z d$$$' __/\__
. $$$, ,$$$$$$ o $$$$$$, ,$$$ d$$$' . `\ oo /
: `Y$$Ss,sS$$$$$$$, ,$$$$$$$Ss,sS$$P' d$$$' : |/\|
_ __ _i__ __ _`"Y$$$P"$$$$Y$$qs,sS$$P'__`"Y$$$P"'__ _d$$$'_ __.,i___ __ _ _
!`^"Y$Ss, $$$$ `"*$$$8"' ,$$$$$$$$$$7'! sig by:
__/\__ : `Y$$Ss, $$$$ fRC+XtC 4$$P""""""' : kRiSiS
\ OO / . `"$$$$a. ,$$$P . ^fORCE^
/_\/_\ `"$$$$$$$7' Brought To You By The Letter "k"
\/ `^""^'
Mr.P
On 25 Sep 1996 17:23:01 GMT, bizz...@mbox.vol.it (Fabio Bizzetti)
wrote:
>>One last thing: before saying anything against directx2, please know
>>the---------------->> Facts.
>WHY should I use a (wannabe or not) multitasking system for my demos/games
>when I can get all the machine power going to program it directly, and
>exploit the hardware thru VESA/AF (accelerator functions) and (when
>available) 3D libraries eventually?
Well, since all x86 processors [and pretty much all processors in
existence] are NOT capable of true multitasking [see my definition of
multitasking below], everything's going to be wanna-be. :)
[Multitasking, in my opinion, is multiple threads running at the exact
same time, which sort of blocks out superscalar architectures..]
>Anyway: wanna make demos for Windows95? Do it.
>Dont wanna make demos for Windows95? Dont make them.
This is the main point we're trying to make here. Don't come to us and
try to SELL Win95 to us. We know its strengths and weaknesses, and if
we feel like making a Win95 demo, we will.
>I personally would even avoid to use Dos/BIOS (for the few things it is used),
>and code my own OS, but if the most low-level I can go is Dos, then I surely
>dont wanna go more high-level with Windows95.
You really do? You're going to need to make your own boot disk for
this. :)
Either that, or take control of the system, write over DOS, install
your own interrupt handlers, and there's your 100% system control
right there. [Yeah, who needs it for a demo. :)]
>I hope that in comp.sys.ibm.pc.demos there will be no flamewar between Dos
>and Windows95 demo coders: live and let live; let's compare the results if
>you are not afraid of it. And dont bother about others' choices, think only
>about yours.
On this one I'm going to have to be a bit pessimistic.
We've had GUS vs SB and IBM vs Amiga debates... it's almost inevitable
somebody will post flamebait.
Antti Piirainen
mau...@niksula.hut.fi (Markus Aurala) writes:
>I'd prefer something like 'Win95 multimedia art scene' or something
>like that.
Forget "art", add "multimedia", "internet" and "information superhighway" :)
--
-------- Antti Piirainen a.k.a. Addict ^ http://www.lut.fi/~piiraine --------
| Doomsday ^ Topaz Carlsbergslinje ^ Solaria {mechanic audio} |
| "Heavy drinking does kill brain cells. |
-------- But, most of us only use 10% of our cells anyway, Party on." -------
Ville Nummela
On 2 Oct 1996, Antti Piirainen wrote:
> >However.. I can imagine one not having enough money to buy some extra
> >diskspace to install linux.
> By looking at the works of most of today's PC coders (it was about
> a "democoder" installing Linux), they all seem to have these Pentium
> xxx:s, I don't think they came with a 100 meg hard disk.. :)
It's funny, but most of the coders I know DON'T have Pentium n+1Mhz:s.
It's just that those compomachines are always Pentiums. I myself have
486/100, and I don't have enough diskspace for installing linux :(
--
-=ViGe/gasp inc.=-
E-Mail: Ville....@lut.fi http://www.lut.fi/~vnummela
Mikko Piironen
On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Ville Nummela wrote:
> It's funny, but most of the coders I know DON'T have Pentium n+1Mhz:s.
> It's just that those compomachines are always Pentiums. I myself have
> 486/100, and I don't have enough diskspace for installing linux :(
Oh come on, you do :)
--
Mikko.P...@lut.fi
You know how Einstein got bad grades as a kid - Well, mine are even worse!
Ville Nummela
On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Mikko Piironen wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Ville Nummela wrote:
>
> > It's funny, but most of the coders I know DON'T have Pentium n+1Mhz:s.
> > It's just that those compomachines are always Pentiums. I myself have
> > 486/100, and I don't have enough diskspace for installing linux :(
> Oh come on, you do :)
Yeah I do but there's other stuff stealing that diskspace!
Tero Pulkkinen
> > By looking at the works of most of today's PC coders (it was about
> > a "democoder" installing Linux), they all seem to have these Pentium
> > xxx:s, I don't think they came with a 100 meg hard disk.. :)
>
> It's just that those compomachines are always Pentiums. I myself have
> 486/100, and I don't have enough diskspace for installing linux :(
>
I dont usually get it when people say they dont have enough disk space for
linux...
The installation procedure becomes alittle harder when you have to choose which
crap you want to install, but even with very minimal disk space usage you can
make a properly working linux system. (minimal here is about same as size
of a floppy :) As you know the linux installation floppys contain the whole
working linux system and thats 2 floppys.
While linux distributions offer several CD's of utilities and tools, it doesnt
mean you would need that much disk space to get the system running!
=> means its no excuse that you only have 20Mb of harddisk.
-- Tero Pulkkinen -- te...@modeemi.cs.tut.fi --
-- (linux system for ircing fits to ONE floppy)
Simon Kissel
Nektarios Kalogridis wrote:
>
> I think it's about time some demo groups realize that dos will
> eventually die. It's about time some demo groups become more open
> minded and move forward --rather than staying in the same old
> stuff: dos, dos, dos...
Most demo coders don't "use" dos. DOS is just a platform from where the
demo is started, or do you know anyone who calls DOS functions in demos
or dos memory-management?
Demo coders do make use of the hardware, and they do it directly. So the
best thing for a democoder would be a very simple operating system with
an open architecture.
Now, from this point of view, compare Win95/NT/OS/2... with DOS.
You'll see what I mean.
> DirectX2 is powerful enough to produce a high quality demo. Having
Damn, NOTHING can be as powerful as PURE hardware!
There is no need for a multitasker and all this stuff, demos are no
screen savers! Demos were meant for FREAKS, do you remember??
> I am not trying to portray directx2 as a gift from god, but rather
> give the message that a change is good.
Yeah, nice vision of future. Maybe you also want everyone to use the same
3d engine? It's getting BORING already!
> Why are some of you so fanatically against Win95? Can't you
> guys think logically for a moment by putting any hatred feelings
> aside?
Win95 may be nice for your word processor, for network stuff or whatever.
I accept Win95. But using Win95, the demoscene would lose the last bit of
"underground" feeling.
---------------------------------------------
scamp / vacuum - underground scene germany
visit us at wired'96 (VACSID final release)
---------------------------------------------
Mikko Piironen
> > > It's funny, but most of the coders I know DON'T have Pentium n+1Mhz:s.
> > > It's just that those compomachines are always Pentiums. I myself have
> > > 486/100, and I don't have enough diskspace for installing linux :(
>
> Yeah I do but there's other stuff stealing that diskspace!
Delete that stuff.
Fabio Bizzetti
Mr.P (m...@trance.pei.edu) wrote:
>On 25 Sep 1996 17:23:01 GMT, bizz...@mbox.vol.it (Fabio Bizzetti)
>wrote:
>>>One last thing: before saying anything against directx2, please know
>>>the---------------->> Facts.
>>Facts:
>>WHY should I use a (wannabe or not) multitasking system for my demos/games
>>when I can get all the machine power going to program it directly, and
>>exploit the hardware thru VESA/AF (accelerator functions) and (when
>>available) 3D libraries eventually?
>Well, since all x86 processors [and pretty much all processors in
>existence] are NOT capable of true multitasking [see my definition of
>multitasking below], everything's going to be wanna-be. :)
>[Multitasking, in my opinion, is multiple threads running at the exact
>same time, which sort of blocks out superscalar architectures..]
That's "multiprocessing",0 anyway. ;)
Anyway I sure agree with you that for games/demos the only OS multitasking
that has sense is having many CPU's controlled by your program (i.e. "launch
an asyncronous operation using CPU number 3 and continue.. then at any moment
you're able to check if it finished or not"), or if you have only one CPU,
program your interrupts as you prefer. Who needs an OS? WE are the best OS. O:)
>>Anyway: wanna make demos for Windows95? Do it.
>>Dont wanna make demos for Windows95? Dont make them.
>This is the main point we're trying to make here. Don't come to us and
>try to SELL Win95 to us. We know its strengths and weaknesses, and if
>we feel like making a Win95 demo, we will.
Yeah, and whenever someone comes out (you can't imagine how many on
rec.games.programmer) and says "DOS IS DEAD!!! PROGRAM FOR W95-ONLY OR DIE!"
I wonder if they're just as they appear of if they hope that Billy Boy is
reading and thus will send them a cheque with written "thank$". ;)
>>I personally would even avoid to use Dos/BIOS (for the few things it is
>>used), and code my own OS, but if the most low-level I can go is Dos, then I
>>surely dont wanna go more high-level with Windows95.
>You really do? You're going to need to make your own boot disk for
>this. :)
>Either that, or take control of the system, write over DOS, install
>your own interrupt handlers, and there's your 100% system control
>right there. [Yeah, who needs it for a demo. :)]
That's what I do in fact ;) I still call it "my own OS", also if it uses
few BIOS/DOS calls to set up some things.
>>I hope that in comp.sys.ibm.pc.demos there will be no flamewar between Dos
>>and Windows95 demo coders: live and let live; let's compare the results if
>>you are not afraid of it. And dont bother about others' choices, think only
>>about yours.
>On this one I'm going to have to be a bit pessimistic.
>We've had GUS vs SB and IBM vs Amiga debates... it's almost inevitable
>somebody will post flamebait.
I'm really sick of them, I just dismissed myself from the Amiga newsgroups'
flame thermonuclear war << ēųdź®z suck, and C/C++ programmers are the only
real programmers and rule the world, and you suck, you suck and you suck >> ;(
But, I must say one thing now: WINDOWS95 SUCKS!!!! O;-D
Sorry, had to say it. O:)
>-----------
>Mr.P, m...@spartan.pei.edu
>Coder, master procrastinator, and loudmouth.
>"In German, a young lady has no sex, while a turnip has."
>- Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens), "That Awful German Language"
Bye ;)
---------------------------------------
Fabio Bizzetti - bizz...@mbox.vol.it
sex...@aol.com
Scott Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>
> Mr.P (m...@trance.pei.edu) wrote:
> : >: Also, the speed of the demo will vary depending on the graphics card the
> : >: system has.
> : >No shit, Sherlock.
> : >Same goes for DOS, Linux, whatever operating system you're running under.
> : >If you can make a demo under Windoze'95 that runs the same speed
> : >regardless of what computer system it is run on (within reason,
> : >obviously), regardless of what "background tasks" there are, keeps the
> : >demo synched perfectly to the music the whole way through, doesn't crash,
> : >and most importantly, is a decent demo, I'll kiss your arse.
>
> : Keeping synchronization to music isn't that hard in code, you know.
> : The tough part is the design of it.
>
> Under DOS, yes, under Windoze, I guess it wouldn't be too hard to just
> stop/start effects at certain points in the music, but more "advanced"
> synchronization, I think would be much harder (e.g. the "woosh"
> accompanying the 3d letters racing past in FC's Panic (or was it some
> other FC demo)), considering the problems with speed constancy.
i think that demo was fishtro but it was an animation!
> : As for the first requirement (runs at the same perceived speed
> : regardless of what hardware it's running on), that will only be
> : achieved through 3D accelerator functions. On the other hand, that
> : would restrict the demo to being either fully 3D or having to ship
> : with an addon board that does all the calculating.
> : No, 100% animations don't count..
>
> Now, there was a thread in this very newsgroup regarding the way Fashion
> runs on the same speed on a 486dx33 up to a Pentium, obviously this CAN be
> done under DOS, but I'd _REALLY_ like to see it done under Windoze.
what is 'windoze'? maybe you typoed 'windows'? why cant it be done under windows? windows can do anything they even say "where do you
want to go today"... moron...
wow that was cool but it looked kinda messed up... what was it supposed to be, becuz aol mite be using a differnet font
Pascal Quentin Porcupine
m...@trance.pei.edu (Mr.P) wrote:
>On 25 Sep 1996 17:23:01 GMT, bizz...@mbox.vol.it (Fabio Bizzetti)
>wrote:
>>>One last thing: before saying anything against directx2, please know
>>>the---------------->> Facts.
>>Facts:
>>WHY should I use a (wannabe or not) multitasking system for my demos/games
>>when I can get all the machine power going to program it directly, and
>>exploit the hardware thru VESA/AF (accelerator functions) and (when
>>available) 3D libraries eventually?
>Well, since all x86 processors [and pretty much all processors in
>existence] are NOT capable of true multitasking [see my definition of
>multitasking below], everything's going to be wanna-be. :)
>[Multitasking, in my opinion, is multiple threads running at the exact
>same time, which sort of blocks out superscalar architectures..]
actually... the Pentium Pro *can*. it's able to spawn a 'virtual cpu'
to process stuff in parallel for up to 30 atoms.
so can the Cyrix 6x86 series.
>>Anyway: wanna make demos for Windows95? Do it.
>>Dont wanna make demos for Windows95? Dont make them.
>This is the main point we're trying to make here. Don't come to us and
>try to SELL Win95 to us. We know its strengths and weaknesses, and if
>we feel like making a Win95 demo, we will.
werd. :)
---
quantum porcupine, coder, musician | that which is, is not
and porcupine. mailto:jsh...@nmsu.edu | that which can, can not
http://infinity.beve.blacksburg.va.us/~porcpine | that which does, does not
Scott Stuart Buchanan
> <325486...@aol.com>
Distribution:
sex...@aol.com wrote:
What is it with the influx of aolers lately?
: > synchronization, I think would be much harder (e.g. the "woosh"
: > accompanying the 3d letters racing past in FC's Panic (or was it some
: > other FC demo)), considering the problems with speed constancy.
: i think that demo was fishtro but it was an animation!
No, it was not in Fishtro, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't an animation.
: > done under DOS, but I'd _REALLY_ like to see it done under Windoze.
: what is 'windoze'? maybe you typoed 'windows'?
: why cant it be done under windows? windows can do anything they even say
: "where do you want to go today"... moron...
You're half right, I meant to type 'Winblows'. I won't even bother with
the rest of that bullshit.
: wow that was cool but it looked kinda messed up...
: what was it supposed to be, becuz aol mite be using a differnet font
A big Ascii drawing saying "Gobz"
,sS$P!
Scott Buchanan $$$$ : aka Goblin -of-> fORCE & xTAtiC
http://www.cse.unsw.EDU.AU/~s2190983 $$$$ . email: s219...@cse.unsw.EDU.AU
Scratch & Sniff [ ] Smells like glass, doesn't it?
Pascal Quentin Porcupine
p15...@zori.cs.tut.fi (Tero Pulkkinen) wrote:
>> > By looking at the works of most of today's PC coders (it was about
>> > a "democoder" installing Linux), they all seem to have these Pentium
>> > xxx:s, I don't think they came with a 100 meg hard disk.. :)
>>
>> It's funny, but most of the coders I know DON'T have Pentium n+1Mhz:s.
>> It's just that those compomachines are always Pentiums. I myself have
>> 486/100, and I don't have enough diskspace for installing linux :(
>>
>I dont usually get it when people say they dont have enough disk space for
>linux...
>The installation procedure becomes alittle harder when you have to choose which
>crap you want to install, but even with very minimal disk space usage you can
>make a properly working linux system. (minimal here is about same as size
>of a floppy :) As you know the linux installation floppys contain the whole
>working linux system and thats 2 floppys.
>While linux distributions offer several CD's of utilities and tools, it doesnt
>mean you would need that much disk space to get the system running!
yeah... on IRC people are often telling me "i'd run linux but if i
were to, i'd have to put it on my 100meg hard drive". but 100 megs is
more than enough for a full developer installation, i.e. full system,
all useful development tools, and XWindows.
Babis Mihael
your maybe forgot that the Gravis ultrasound drivers and PnP's are
very buggy and unstable!
Pascal Quentin Porcupine
s219...@cse.unsw.edu.au (Scott Stuart Buchanan) wrote:
>> <325486...@aol.com>
>Distribution:
>sex...@aol.com wrote:
>What is it with the influx of aolers lately?
dunno. but i have noticed that on most of the newsgroups i'm on, most
of the AOL responses are about a month lagged (though this one appears
to be an exception).
>: > synchronization, I think would be much harder (e.g. the "woosh"
>: > accompanying the 3d letters racing past in FC's Panic (or was it some
>: > other FC demo)), considering the problems with speed constancy.
>: i think that demo was fishtro but it was an animation!
>No, it was not in Fishtro, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't an animation.
heh, actually... okay, the 3D letters were in Panic. but i think that
they were, in fact, an animation (i mean, coders still haven't figured
out efficient anti-aliasing *today*, much less in 1993 :)
remember, FC did a *lot* of things which were hard to believe that
they were realtime. because they weren't. :) take, for example, the
explosion in 2ndreal (POVray animation), the flying 'FC' in Unreal
(3DS animation), the fractal zoomer in Panic (well okay, not really an
animation, but not exactly realtime either :)... those are the only
ones i can think of off-paw though :)
>: > done under DOS, but I'd _REALLY_ like to see it done under Windoze.
>: what is 'windoze'? maybe you typoed 'windows'?
>: why cant it be done under windows? windows can do anything they even say
>: "where do you want to go today"... moron...
>You're half right, I meant to type 'Winblows'. I won't even bother with
>the rest of that bullshit.
AOLamers are so silly. :)
Mr.P
On 3 Oct 1996 11:15:12 GMT, bizz...@mbox.vol.it (Fabio Bizzetti)
wrote:
>Mr.P (m...@trance.pei.edu) wrote:
> >Well, since all x86 processors [and pretty much all processors in
> >existence] are NOT capable of true multitasking [see my definition of
> >multitasking below], everything's going to be wanna-be. :)
> >[Multitasking, in my opinion, is multiple threads running at the exact
> >same time, which sort of blocks out superscalar architectures..]
Multiprocessing, multithreading, multitasking, what's the difference..
I gotta find me a glossary somewhere.
>Anyway I sure agree with you that for games/demos the only OS multitasking
>that has sense is having many CPU's controlled by your program (i.e. "launch
>an asyncronous operation using CPU number 3 and continue.. then at any moment
>you're able to check if it finished or not"), or if you have only one CPU,
>program your interrupts as you prefer. Who needs an OS? WE are the best OS. O:)
Well, handling multiple processors is a task best left in the design
stage.. in a large project, it's going to be extremely hard to take a
large stream of code designed for ONE processor and rip it apart into
threads. It's easier to make four small shirts out of a large amount
of material than it is to make four small shirts out of one large
shirt. :)
[Hey, the analogy seems OK to me...]
> >>Anyway: wanna make demos for Windows95? Do it.
> >>Dont wanna make demos for Windows95? Dont make them.
> >This is the main point we're trying to make here. Don't come to us and
> >try to SELL Win95 to us. We know its strengths and weaknesses, and if
> >we feel like making a Win95 demo, we will.
>Yeah, and whenever someone comes out (you can't imagine how many on
>rec.games.programmer) and says "DOS IS DEAD!!! PROGRAM FOR W95-ONLY OR DIE!"
>I wonder if they're just as they appear of if they hope that Billy Boy is
>reading and thus will send them a cheque with written "thank$". ;)
It's called "I want something done but I'm too f***ing lazy to do it
so I want you to do it or I'll give you an empty threat that I can
probably be prosecuted for if you could find me." :)
Anyhow, after wading through several large piles of Win95-only games
[I don't buy them; my friends do, and I just borrow the games from
them], I have to conclude that Win95 is still not a truly viable
gaming platform. Too many crashes, too much disk space consumed, and
the fact that DirectX 1 seems to hate DirectX 2.
Getting back on topic...
> >>I personally would even avoid to use Dos/BIOS (for the few things it is
> >>used), and code my own OS, but if the most low-level I can go is Dos, then I
> >>surely dont wanna go more high-level with Windows95.
> >You really do? You're going to need to make your own boot disk for
> >this. :)
> >Either that, or take control of the system, write over DOS, install
> >your own interrupt handlers, and there's your 100% system control
> >right there. [Yeah, who needs it for a demo. :)]
>That's what I do in fact ;) I still call it "my own OS", also if it uses
>few BIOS/DOS calls to set up some things.
Well, just to be completely fair to everyone, there should be a
warning at the beginning. No, I'm not doing it for you. :)
> >>I hope that in comp.sys.ibm.pc.demos there will be no flamewar between Dos
> >>and Windows95 demo coders: live and let live; let's compare the results if
> >>you are not afraid of it. And dont bother about others' choices, think only
> >>about yours.
> >On this one I'm going to have to be a bit pessimistic.
> >We've had GUS vs SB and IBM vs Amiga debates... it's almost inevitable
> >somebody will post flamebait.
>I'm really sick of them, I just dismissed myself from the Amiga newsgroups'
>flame thermonuclear war << ēųdź®z suck, and C/C++ programmers are the only
>real programmers and rule the world, and you suck, you suck and you suck >> ;(
It's called "denial". No, I mean the people who hold that above
opinion... or thought reform by very harsh means. Either way, it only
helps to infuriate people... which is probably why it's called
flamebait.
Mr.P
On Thu, 03 Oct 1996 20:38:11 -0700, sex...@aol.com wrote:
>> Under DOS, yes, under Windoze, I guess it wouldn't be too hard to just
>> stop/start effects at certain points in the music, but more "advanced"
>> synchronization, I think would be much harder (e.g. the "woosh"
>> accompanying the 3d letters racing past in FC's Panic (or was it some
>> other FC demo)), considering the problems with speed constancy.
>i think that demo was fishtro but it was an animation!
I'm not going to reply to this one... directly, anyway.
Path: io.innovplace.saskatoon.sk.ca!...!bubba.NMSU.Edu!usenet
From: sex...@aol.com
Organization: New Mexico State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: mac-sh118pow01.cs.nmsu.edu
You see what I'm getting at? QP, is that you behind the lamer glass?
:)
Mr.P
On 02 Oct 1996 22:37:41 +0200, p15...@zori.cs.tut.fi (Tero Pulkkinen)
wrote:
>> > By looking at the works of most of today's PC coders (it was about
>> > a "democoder" installing Linux), they all seem to have these Pentium
>> > xxx:s, I don't think they came with a 100 meg hard disk.. :)
>> It's funny, but most of the coders I know DON'T have Pentium n+1Mhz:s.
>> It's just that those compomachines are always Pentiums. I myself have
>> 486/100, and I don't have enough diskspace for installing linux :(
>I dont usually get it when people say they dont have enough disk space for
>linux...
>The installation procedure becomes alittle harder when you have to choose which
>crap you want to install, but even with very minimal disk space usage you can
>make a properly working linux system. (minimal here is about same as size
>of a floppy :) As you know the linux installation floppys contain the whole
>working linux system and thats 2 floppys.
well, for the main kernel itself and a few login utilities, sure,
1.44MB works...
Awhile back I grabbed Slackware 3.1 [too lazy to grab anything else
for now :)] and put it all on tape, and then proceeded to install it
using the regular install scripts. A full install with X ate up 200MB.
By selective paring of programs, elimination of source files,
elimination of manual files [not a good idea in most cases], and
elimination of much of the Linux kernel files, I got it down to 80MB.
I've heard 40MB, but I don't want to spemd more time figuring out how
to gain an additional 40MB on a 3.1GB HD...
Pascal Quentin Porcupine
m...@trance.pei.edu (Mr.P) wrote:
>On Thu, 03 Oct 1996 20:38:11 -0700, sex...@aol.com wrote:
>>> Under DOS, yes, under Windoze, I guess it wouldn't be too hard to just
>>> stop/start effects at certain points in the music, but more "advanced"
>>> synchronization, I think would be much harder (e.g. the "woosh"
>>> accompanying the 3d letters racing past in FC's Panic (or was it some
>>> other FC demo)), considering the problems with speed constancy.
>>i think that demo was fishtro but it was an animation!
>I'm not going to reply to this one... directly, anyway.
>Path: io.innovplace.saskatoon.sk.ca!...!bubba.NMSU.Edu!usenet
>From: sex...@aol.com
>Organization: New Mexico State University
>NNTP-Posting-Host: mac-sh118pow01.cs.nmsu.edu
>You see what I'm getting at? QP, is that you behind the lamer glass?
aw, shucks, you blew my cover :P
but i posted it from a macintosh, so at least it's legitimately lame.
Mr.P
four posts, one thread. limit reached...
On Sun, 06 Oct 1996 12:24:41 GMT, q...@antistatic.com (Pascal Quentin
Porcupine) wrote:
>m...@trance.pei.edu (Mr.P) wrote:
>>On Thu, 03 Oct 1996 20:38:11 -0700, sex...@aol.com wrote:
>>>> Under DOS, yes, under Windoze, I guess it wouldn't be too hard to just
>>>> stop/start effects at certain points in the music, but more "advanced"
>>>> synchronization, I think would be much harder (e.g. the "woosh"
>>>> accompanying the 3d letters racing past in FC's Panic (or was it some
>>>> other FC demo)), considering the problems with speed constancy.
>>>i think that demo was fishtro but it was an animation!
>>I'm not going to reply to this one... directly, anyway.
>>Path: io.innovplace.saskatoon.sk.ca!...!bubba.NMSU.Edu!usenet
>>From: sex...@aol.com
>>Organization: New Mexico State University
>>NNTP-Posting-Host: mac-sh118pow01.cs.nmsu.edu
>>You see what I'm getting at? QP, is that you behind the lamer glass?
>aw, shucks, you blew my cover :P
>but i posted it from a macintosh, so at least it's legitimately lame.
>:)
heheheheh, the problem with you is that you're way too obvious. :)
at least, have the indecency to post from AOL or something...
Pascal Quentin Porcupine
m...@trance.pei.edu (Mr.P) wrote:
>four posts, one thread. limit reached...
>On Sun, 06 Oct 1996 12:24:41 GMT, q...@antistatic.com (Pascal Quentin
>Porcupine) wrote:
>>m...@trance.pei.edu (Mr.P) wrote:
>>>On Thu, 03 Oct 1996 20:38:11 -0700, sex...@aol.com wrote:
>>>>> Under DOS, yes, under Windoze, I guess it wouldn't be too hard to just
>>>>> stop/start effects at certain points in the music, but more "advanced"
>>>>> synchronization, I think would be much harder (e.g. the "woosh"
>>>>> accompanying the 3d letters racing past in FC's Panic (or was it some
>>>>> other FC demo)), considering the problems with speed constancy.
>>>>i think that demo was fishtro but it was an animation!
>>>I'm not going to reply to this one... directly, anyway.
>>>Path: io.innovplace.saskatoon.sk.ca!...!bubba.NMSU.Edu!usenet
>>>From: sex...@aol.com
>>>Organization: New Mexico State University
>>>NNTP-Posting-Host: mac-sh118pow01.cs.nmsu.edu
>>>You see what I'm getting at? QP, is that you behind the lamer glass?
>>aw, shucks, you blew my cover :P
>>but i posted it from a macintosh, so at least it's legitimately lame.
>>:)
>heheheheh, the problem with you is that you're way too obvious. :)
>at least, have the indecency to post from AOL or something...
i would, but my parents finally cancelled their account. :)