From:	leathm AT solwarra DOT gbrmpa DOT gov DOT au (Leath Muller)
Message-Id:	<199704290141.LAA26759@solwarra.gbrmpa.gov.au>
Subject:	Re: Quake and DJGPP
To:	tudor AT cam DOT org
Date:	Tue, 29 Apr 1997 11:41:46 +1000 (EST)
Cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<3363A2B5.62B7@cam.org> from "Tudor" at Apr 27, 97 03:02:13 pm

> > 1. Winquake is actually a little faster than the DOS version. (unless
> > you'll run it on a low-end PC (e.g. a 486 with 8Mb)

> No, I have a P133 16 mb ram. But windoze95 is a piece of sh*t and moves
> like it's dead or something.

Then something is wrong with your system. WinQuake renders to a 320x240 res.
and uses hardware acceleration to scale to 640x480 and 800x600 etc... I get
about 28FPS on my P166 at 640x480 in a window... Nothing wrong with 95, just
your system I would say...

> > 2. Id has anounced they won't make any DOS products anymore.

> Why? I have warcraft for Dos and it's cool and all, while the
> command&conquer for Windoze95 crashes 10 times a day...

C&C (Red Alert) and WarII are by different people... also, the people who
made War II (Blizzard) have since release Diablo - its Win95 only...

> > 3. There is a windows version of Quake that uses OpenGL (GLQuake) and
> > it's actually very slow on a non-openGL machine, maybe that's what you
> > mean?

The OpenGL version basically _requires_ hardware acceleration. It uses
bilinear (or is it tri?) filtering, only runs at 640x480 above etc, and
runs at about .1 FPS on my 166 ... :)  But hey, it looks as good as the
N64... Now, only if I can grab an N64 graphics card... ;)

> Ok, they don't support dos anymore. What about UNIX/LINUX/etc ?

Other people port to these systems, so they are still supported...

Leathal.

- Raw text -