General retrocomputing hardware and software discussion. Get help, give help, show off, shoot the shit, discuss your hobby.
Welcome: Windows 1.x-3.x/9x/NT, MS/PC-DOS, OS/2, Classic Mac OS 1-9, Amiga, 8-bit home systems, CP/M, Legacy Unix platforms, anything pre-1999 you can possibly think of
Tolerated: Windows 2000, Windows Me, OS X on PowerPC systems, GNU/Linux (relating to retro hardware)
Tolerated, but discouraged: Retro consoles (there's /vr/ for that guys), DOS game emulation (/vr/)
pls go: XP, OS X on Intel systems
>daily reminder that /retro/ is a no bullying zone
>daily reminder that you can filter tripfags you don't like for whatever reason so we don't have to hear your whining
>daily reminder to go fuck yourself
I used to like these threads too.
>>43174957
Did the guy who was making that DOS software catalogue ever finish, or did he just give up?
>>43174988
I took the OP verbatim from the last thread.
is RasPi tolerated here
>>43175169
What are you doing on it?
Emulating old systems, probably
Just running modern stuff, doubtful.
>>43175200
This isn't the thread for what I'm doing with it, I'm just excited and eager to talk about it and there isn't a thread up for it right now.
repeating from last thread:
>>43174655
I was given a PowerBook 145B. It has 4MB RAM and the cpu uses m68k architecture. What is the most modern OS I could run on it?
Any kind of linux?
MSX doesn't count as a retro console, does it?
>>43175219
I'd call it an 8-bit-home-system myself.
I have an ibook G4. What linux distros support ppc and can run Xorg with 128MB RAM or less?
These threads need more Windows NT. I think to make these threads more interesting, we should make challenges for other anons to try to complete with their old technology
>inb4 install gentoo
>>43175475
See, some retro computers have 4GB of RAM, and some have 4KB, so any kind of competition/challenge would be trivial for some and not possible for others.
>>43175475
Challenge 1:
Install Windows 98 on a 386DX, screenshot CPU-Z for proof.
Yes it's possible, just run the 98 setup with no checks and at least 8MB RAM.
>>43174988
>being the reason the greentext is there
>>43175217
Just run System 7 on it, you'll have a larger base of applications to choose from that will run much better on that system.
Why use something that old to do the exact same thing you could be doing far better on a modern platform?
>>43175405
Debian PowerPC would probably run okay, I have no personal experience with it though.
>>43175607
>Why use something that old to do the exact same thing you could be doing far better on a modern platform?
Why are you in this thread? I do it for the challenge.
Just a heads-up to another thread about a NeXT:
>>43175092
>>43175651
I like the whole experience, the challenge is fine too though.
Here's a page about running Debian on older 68k systems:
http://www.jagshouse.com/Linuxm68k.html
>>43175715
I appreciate the help, but I don't think that will work. It says there is no floppy drive support, but the computer has no cd drive: just a floppy drive. Also, the writer says that he just gets by with 5MB RAM, and I have 20% less than that.
>>43175856
You'll have to get an AppleCD drive and an HDI-30 SCSI cable to connect it, along with a RAM upgrade. Unfortunately you're stuck running Mac OS unless you want to do either of those things.
>>43175963
Yeah, I'm not really willing to pay money (especially for apple products) to use 20 year old hardware. I guess I'll jut have to settle for updating the OS it has.
>>43176055
You can find that gear pretty cheaply if you keep an eye out, it'll just take a while.
If you didn't already know, macintoshgarden is a great place to start looking for software.
>>43175475
How about this? I tried to make it as even as possible. Extra points for doing these things on real hardware and not in a VM/emulator.
>>43176255
The laptop docking one might be really hard, so should I suggest something else instead?
>>43176255
>I've already done half of these
>It wasn't considered retro back then
>>43174957
I have a 1994 SPARCstation 5 with Soalris 9 installed. Only bad thing is my NVRam went bad 2 weeks ago, and I can't do anything until I Fix/ replace it. Does anyone know where to get an NVRam chip for a SS5?
>>43176436
I tried to make some things easier and some harder. I also wanted some of them to be common tasks that people actually did back in the day, and others to be strange tasks that people don't do very often, like playing games on NT 3.51 and installing Windows Chicago on a real computer. Also my old videos of playing Unreal and Deus Ex on NT 3.51 don't count.
>>43176255
>surf the web on 3.1
i wanna see how bad the browser would blow up when visiting any site at all
>>43176255
>free space isn't "install gentoo"
>>43176472
There are still plenty of Web 1.0 sites active, some even still on webrings. They'd display just fine, dancing baby gif and all.
>>43176255
>tfw laptop is docked right now
>>43176486
Why not install Gentoo on a 486? I was going to make "install gentoo" an option but it was just too cliche for /g/.
>>43175475
Hey AthlonDude, this is the guy who suggested using the VBEMP driver for NT 3.51 on that Compaq laptop. Did you ever try that out?
If so, how did it work out for you?
>>43175169
Why would it be?
>>43176472
Trying this out in a VM.
Anybody know the Port, I/O, and DMA settings for the PCnet PCI card in VirtualBox?
>>43174957
Too modern?
>>43178035
Katmai is fine.
Coppermine is pushing it.
Tualatin is too modern.
I've been thinking about trying to get my hands on an old computer, something like pic related, with intact period-correct stickers, gutting it, and using the case for a new build, preferably something beefy to further contrast the case's claims
My only concern would be whether one of those cases has sufficient cooling/space for modern components
>tfw trying to "figure" out EGA and VGA planar modes
Goddamn, what a screwed-up mess. Whoever designed these things should be dragged out into the street and shot.
>>43178035
Nevermind, got it working.
Pic related.
Any browsers or other software you guys want to see? Got full archives of WinWorldPC and Simtelnet.
>>43178247
>My only concern would be whether one of those cases has sufficient cooling/space for modern components
Those generally took gimped MicroATX mobos. Also, half-size PSUs. So probably not. Some really early ones even used Baby-AT mobos.
As for cooling, don't count on it.
Maybe a low-power ITX or mATX board might do okay in there, like one with a passively-cooled CPU?
>>43178247
Maybe cut a hole around the original fan and stick a 120 in there?
OH CHRIST.
Modern 4chan has too much JavaScript for Netscape to handle.
>>43178247
Pavilions were shit new and they're even shittier now, both hardware-wise and case-wise go for the cases Dell was using just before the switch to the black monstrosities we all love to hate now or certain HP Business systems that were mostly ATX-compliant except for the LED connectors that were all put in one block.
An old ATX whitebox case is fine too.
>>43178373
I tried getting on 4chin from my IRIX box running 4.08 and nearly killed myself until I disabled javascript. It's just undoable now ;_;
>>43178418
>>43178373
This guy's trying to post to /g/ using a NeXTstation
>>43175092
>>43178453
Heh, I actually have that thread in another tab at the moment.
Pretty cool shit. I wouldn't mind having a Color NeXT system. Though I can pretend by installing MidnightBSD or Debian with Window Maker/GNUstep.
Someone mentions its possible to post without JavaScript, so I'll disable it.
IE sees the amount of JS before the page load and says "fuck that, general protection fault"
>>43178418
You have an SGI System? Which one?
Somebody mentioned they were able to do 4chan even on the oldass Indigo2.
>>43178418
I regularly browsed 4chan back in 2010 with an Octane (R12k 270 MHz) running 6.5.30
Well, what do you know.
Looks like Opera survived.
>dat hotlist
Remember when the internet was full of interesting, original content?
>>43178199
I feel like a PIII is the cut-off for retro. But of course, I may only be saying that because my 98 machine is running a 900 MHz PIII.
>>43178682
Damn, even with JavaScript enabled, can't get the captchas to show up.
Maybe if I had a 4chan Pass, i could do this.
>>43178682
>Year 2000 Problem
how cute
>>43178266
Why do they suck?
>>43178767
It's a dual Xeon workstation manufactured in 1999. Pentium III Xeon microprocessors with Tanner core have the same CPU ID as Katmai core
>>43178814
http://www.osdever.net/FreeVGA/vga/graphreg.htm
You tell me.
>CGA, Tandy, VGA Mode 13
>set video mode
>write pixel data to VRAM
>these modes
>switch 20 confusing registers around depending on whether you're reading or writing pixel data
"This field is used in Write Mode 0 and Write Mode 3 (See the Write Mode field.) In these modes, the host data is rotated to the right by the value specified by the value of this field. A rotation operation consists of moving bits 7-1 right one position to bits 6-0, simultaneously wrapping bit 0 around to bit 7, and is repeated the number of times specified by this field."
I mean, what the fuck is this?
So close
>>43178793
Would you like to use mine?
>>43178858
EGA Modes D and E and VGA Modes 11/12 are painfully slow in assembly language, to say nothing of using the BIOS INT 10h Function C.
>>43178956
>>43178858
From a programming standpoint, EGA and VGA modes (excluding Mode 13) all work essentially the same. You have four planes for the red, green, blue, and intensity data, which are either 8, 16, 32, or 64k in size depending on the mode used. Only one can be seen by the CPU at a time, although all four may be written to at once depending on the register settings.
And yes, the programming of them requires a lot of register writes and is slow and complicated, which is why Mode 13 (so easy a caveman can do it) is recommended despite its low resolution.
>>43179206
VGA also lets you palette-swap any colors you like in Modes D and E which is not possible on a real EGA card.
>>43179206
To clarify, if you're in Mode D (320x200x16), the planes are 8k in size and go from A000:0000 to A000:1FFF. If you're in Mode 12 (640x480x16), the planes are 64k and occupy the entire A000 segment.
I have no idea either why you have to bank switch the planes in the lower modes since there's no reason you can't fit all of them into the VRAM segment.
>>43175219
The MSX is a computer. Yes you can play games on it, but it has MSX-DOS, printer ports, serial ports on some models, cassette ports, stuff like that. So no, it's no a console.
>>43174957
I purchase a new car radio for my car and i got one with a cd player so i can have that retro feel of using CDs again, USB is more comfortable but nothings beats that orgasmic feel when the mechanic hungrily swallows your CD in
>>43176255
>surf the web on Windows 3.1
Easy! Trumpet Winsock TCP stack and Opera, IE5 & Netscape 4.
>Play Doom on a network via serial port
Do null-modem cable duels count?
>Warp us away to the land of OS/2
OS/2 Warp 4 is one of my favorite OS. I don't have it installed for the moment, but a few month ago, yes, i had it on an old Pentium II.
>connect to a BBS
Yep, and a Dial-up one! Nostromo BBS+44 1582-600882
>Hook a vintage CRT up to a modern computer
My Samsung Syncmaster is from 1999, it can go up to 1920*1440, and has a max refresh rate of 180Hz, I don't know why I should buy an LCD when this monitor is better than most of them.
>Play game on your Amiga
Dungeon Master, Captive, Star Control and Hybris.
>Post an old PC with an x86 CPU not made by AMD or Intel
My Victor V86p has a 80c86 made by Oki, and I don't know if it counts as it's not really a PC compatible, but my PC-9801N has a NEC CPU.
>Surf the Web on Netscape Navigator
On my Windows 2000 machine, and on my Windows 3.1 too at first (I use opera and internet explorer more)
>>43179989
>surf the web on Windows 3.1
>>43180010
>Play games on your Amiga
>>43180022
>Post an old PC with an x86 CPU not made by AMD or Intel
Not mine, but the exact same model.
Same as >>43180034
This time it is my own photo.
>Post an old PC with an x86 CPU not made by AMD or Intel
Cyrix, the bane of my youth
>live in postsoviet country
>some dude sellin' SGi Indy on local board for ~$70
>FUCKYESSSDOWANT
>mfw there's no display/controllers included
98SE isn't really retro but it is a nostalgia trip.
>>43179206
Here. This draws a couple of colored boxes in Mode 12:;VGABOXES
;
.286
;**************************************************************
st_seg segment stack
db 512d dup (?)
st_seg ends
;**************************************************************
datarea segment
planesegs dw ?
dw ?
dw ?
dw ?
oldcurs dw ?
oldscr dw ?
textscr dw 0b800h
datarea ends
;**************************************************************
prognam segment
;--------------------------------------------------------------
main proc far
assume cs:prognam,ds:datarea
start:
mov ax,datarea
mov ds,ax
mov bx,0fah
mov ah,48h
int 21h
jnc okalloc1
jmp exit
okalloc1:
mov oldscr,ax
xor bx,bx
mov ah,3
int 10h
mov oldcurs,dx
push ds
push es
mov ax,oldscr
mov es,ax
mov ax,textscr
mov ds,ax
xor di,di
xor si,si
mov cx,4000d
rep movsw
pop es
pop ds
mov ax,12h
int 10h
mov dx,3ceh
mov ax,5
out dx,ax
mov ax,3
out dx,ax
mov ax,1
out dx,ax
mov ax,0ff08h
out dx,ax
mov di,planesegs
mov cx,4
malloc_planes:
mov bx,960h
mov ah,48h
int 21h
jnc okalloc2
jmp short cleanup
okalloc2:
stosw
loop mallocplanes
mov si,planesegs
mov cx,4
xor ax,ax
push es
>>43180494
Part 2:clearplanes:
push cx
mov es,[si]
inc si
inc si
xor di,si
mov cx,19200d
rep stosw
pop cx
loop clearplanes
pop es
mov ah,7
int 21h
;draw a few boxes
mov dx,10d
mov cx,10d
mov al,1
mov bx,100d
mov si,150d
boxes:
add dx,bx
push dx
sub dx,bx
add cx,si
push cx
sub cx,si
push ds
push cs
push ax
call fill_box
call moveplanes
add cx,30d
add dx,20d
inc al
cmp al,10h
jnz boxes
call moveplanes
mov ah,7
int 21h
>>43180503
Part 3:cleanup:
mov ax,3
int 10h
;restore old text
push ds
push es
mov ax,textscr
mov es,ax
mov ax,oldscr
mov ds,ax
xor si,si
xor di,di
mov cx,4000d
rep movsw
pop es
pop ds
;restore old cursor
xor bx,bx
mov dx,oldcurs
mov ah,2
int 10h
exit:
mov ax,4c00h
int 21h
main endp
;------------------------------------------------------------------
drawpixel12 proc near
pusha
mov di,dx
shl di,6
shl dx,4
add di,dx
mov bl,cl
and bl,7
shr cx,3
add di,cx
>>43180513
Part 4:mov cl,bl
mov bx,7f80h
shr bx,cl
mov ch,1
mov si,planesegs
nextplane:
mov ax,[si]
mov es,ax
inc si
inc si
and es:[di],bh
test al,ch
jz nopix
or es:[di],bl
nopix:
shl ch,1
test ch,10h
jz nextplane
popa
ret
drawpixel12 endp
;---------------------------------------------------------------
moveplanes proc near
pusha
mov ax,0a000h
mov es,ax
mov bx,planesegs
mov ah,11h
mov dx,3c4h
mov al,2
nextplane:
mov ds,[bx]
inc bx
inc bx
out dx,ax
xor si,si
xor di,di
mov cx,19200d
rep movsw
rol ah,1
cmp ah,11h
jnx nextplane
popa
ret
moveplanes endp
>>43180523
Finally, Part 5:;---------------------------------------------------------------
fill_box proc near
enter 0,0
push ax
push cx
push dx
mov al,[bp+4]
mov dx,[bp+8]
cmp [bp+12],dx
jnc xok
xchg [bp+12],dx
xok:
mov cx,[bp+8]
cmp [bp+10],cx
jnc dopixel
xchg [bp+10],cx
mov [bp+6],cx
dopixel:
call drawpixel12
inc cx
cmp [bp+10],cx
jnc dopixel
mov cx,[bp+6]
inc dx
cmp [bp+12],dx
jnc dopixel
pop dx
pop cx
pop ax
leave
ret 10d
fill_box endp
;----------------------------------------------------------------
prognam ends
;****************************************************************
end start
>>43180494
>>43180503
>>43180513
>>43180523
>>43180537
Thanks anon. I don't know anything about x86 assembly (only 68k and z80), but I still find that it's pretty cool to post it here.
>>43180494
Nice. I picked up x86 assembler again recently, playing around with N(dis)ASM and Ralf Brown's Interrupt List.
I took the ATXOFF.COM tool apart, which can be used to turn off almost any ATX system from DOS using APM:.section text
org 0x100
xor bx, bx ; System BIOS = 0000h
mov ax, 0x5301 ; APM CONNECT REAL-MODE INTERFACE
int 0x15 ; Miscellaneous system services interrupt
xor bx, bx
mov cx,0x102 ; APM version 1.2
mov ax,0x530e ; APM DRIVER VERSION
int 0x15 ; (inform APM that we understand more than version 1.0)
mov ax, 0x5307 ; APM 1.2 TURN OFF SYSTEM
mov cx, 0x3 ; constant
mov bx, 0x1 ; constant
int 0x15
ret ; return to DOS on error
>>43180557
Some of this was from a code listing I found online, but made modifications to. The original listing was set up as a COM file and I rearranged it to be an EXE.
The original listing used INT 21h Function 4Ah to set the total allocated memory to 64k, but I took that out because it's not needed for EXE files (COM files normally commandeer all available memory)
>>43180557
x86 is easy; 680x0 is a scrambled mess.
>>43180891
I'd say the opposite.mov al,[bp+4]
mov dx,[bp+8]
Just what the fuck does this mean!?
>>43180891
It's the other way around anon: x86 is a clusterfuck, while 68k assembly is clean and easy to learn.
>>43180891
>>43180914
Doesn't mean x86 assembler is pretty complex compared to ARM or especially MIPS.
>>43180935
Yeah, but >>43180891 said the x86 assembly is easier than the easiest assembly language ever made, which is bullshit.
>>43180914
Arithmetic and memory addressing all in one, quite convenient for manual asm coding, x86 is kinda the syntactic sugar of assemblys.
>>43180472
>98SE
>nostalgia
How fucking young is /g/?
>>43181005
As young as everybody ever who would remotely label themselves as a “90’s kid”.
>>43180914
The BP register is normally used as an index into the stack segment. You load it with the offset of the data you're trying to access there. That code means "Load AL with the contents of the memory location pointed to by BP plus 4 bytes" (meaning that it uses the address 4 bytes above the one in BP). Unless you use a segment override (eg. mov al,es:[bp+4]), the BP register by default uses whatever segment the SS register is set to.
SP, BX, SI, and DI can also be used as pointers, but they normally point to the data segment (DS) unless an override is used (excluding SP, which of course points to the stack segment). When using 32-bit code however, any general purpose register can be a pointer and you're not limited to BX, SI, DI, SP, and BP.
>>43180975
I didn't say that. Actually 6502 is probably the simplest.
>>43181005
It is the oldest OS that I have that still functions. I never bought 95, I went from 3.1 to 98. I'd install 3.1 but I'm missing a diskette.
>>43181046
Well you said that 68000 is a scrambled mess, while it isn't one.
>>43181005
d-dad? is that you? also, would you pick up some pop-tarts on your way home from work?
>>43181067
The oldest OS I have that still function is CP/M 2.0 for Amstad CPC 6128. Get on my level!
Revised version.
>>43174957
Windows ME is 9x.
>>43181135
Yeh it works more like old Macs and Amigas. There's just flat memory in long mode and all JMPs must be indirect (eg. JMP 16 bytes ahead instead of JMP to an absolute address)
>>43181171
Making a booter program on Amiga allow you to use assembly the way you cant. Otherwise, for Workbench applibation programming, you're better off with C and some assembly routines if you really need speed.
>>43181202
The way you want*
Without these restriction in other words.
>>43181202
Well yeah, because you don't have to worry about code being relocatable so you can use absolute JMPs instead of relative ones.
>Otherwise, for Workbench application programming, you're better off with C and some assembly routines if you really need speed
This was the norm in the Amiga era; games would be programmed in assembly while applications used C.
>>43181171
All Macs actually. Remember that they jumped straight from PPC to x64.
>>43181266
>This was the norm in the Amiga era; games would be programmed in assembly while applications used C.
Yep.
I also think that it's easier to use the ROM routines in C than in assembly.
>>43176255
That reminds me of my Cyrix 6x86. I think it ran at 166 MHz. Always used that instead of my Pentium MMX. Think I'll reuse it if I were to build a computer for MS-DOS games and the early win9x games. My coppermine is usually too fast for those.
>>43181323
It's easier to call Windows API functions in C as well; that's why Roller Coaster Tycoon still used some C code.
>>43181323
By "Amiga era" I of course also meant PCs of the 85-90 period.
>>43176255
Please add "Use a DVD" there
>>43181305
First generation intel macs used Core Solo/Duo processors. They were 32-bit processors.
>>43181005
Just an example, don't assume this is about me:
>Be 14 in 1998
>Win 98 was on my computer
>1998 was 16 years ago
>Now 30 years old
>Nostalgia for what could plausibly have been my first computer, in an age period many adults are nostalgic for.
Is it really that implausible?
>>43181342
But an API is different from simple routines in ROM. Most of the time you use a routine just by JSRing to it's address.
>>43181623
Sounds legit. I'm 28 years and 9 months old. A lot of the stuff from that era makes me feel good. Especially the music.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qapU-Ac1qOI
I skipped Windows 98 tho. Used Windows 95 until I replaced it with Windows 2000 in 2002-2003.
>>43181623
Why would anyone miss being 14? I never never never want to be that age again.
>>43181749
I rather be 14 with no job and living with my parents than 30 with no job and living with my parents.
>>43181643
I really don't know a lot about the Windows API functions or how to call or use them.
>>43181675
Nostalgia goggles doesn't mean something's objective good, faggot.
>>43181810
Did I say something's objective good?
>>43181643
On PCs of course you have soft interrupts instead of jumping to an absolute address.
These both print an A on the screen.
>Commodore 64lda #65
jsr $ffd2
>PCmov dl,65
mov ah,2
int 21h
>>43181862
On the Amiga?
>>43181884
Fuck do I know. You can't go around poking random shit into the VRAM when you have Workbench loaded anyway.
>>43181862
For extremely basic stuff like this, it will work almost the same on any computer, but the more complex the code is, the more it starts diverging.
>>43181884
An the Amiga? Load the right library, set the parameters in the registers, call the routine, close the library.
It's not easy to code stuff like this on an Amiga. It's way easier to code stuff like making a color-cycling raster.
>>43181892
Besides, Amiga doesn't have a real text mode anyway, just 320 and 640x200 graphics.
>>43181945
There's also the interlaced mode 320 & 640*400. And that's if you use your machine in 60Hz mode, in 50Hz mode, the vertical resolutions are 256 when progressive and 512 when interlaced.
>>43181862
For comparison, writing directly to the VRAM (these examples put an A in the upper left corner of the screen while the previous ones put it wherever the cursor happens to be):
>Commodore 64lda #65
sta $400
lda #14
sta $d800
>PCmov ax,0b800h
mov es,ax
mov ax,741h
xor di,di
stosw
>>43181999
Trying that on the Amiga would require 3x as much code.
>>43182033
Problem with Amiga is that you have to get the VRAM location from the video hardware since you normally won't know its location (which isn't fixed like on a PC).
>>43182061
And since you can't just poke random video RAM locations with Workbench running, you probably have to set up a window box and put the graphics data in there. Amiga is quite a lot more complicated than C64 or PeeCees.
>>43182080
It's a newer architecture of course, introduced in 1985 while the C64 and PC predate it by 3 and 4 years respectively. By the mid-80s, the Mac had come out and it was obvious that GUIs were the future direction of everything. PCs only stuck with text mode DOS for as long as they did due to the need for backwards compatibility.
>>43182109
FWIW, the 68000 was a newer and more advanced CPU than the 8086 and more suited for running a GUI.
The 8086 was the last 70s CPU (belonging to the age of the Altair 8800 and CP/M) and the 68000 was the first 80s CPU (belonging to the age of GUIs and mice).
>>43182061
The problem is that you can't ask its location. You have to tell the Copper coprocessor to write sutff on VRAM for you:
http://amigadev.elowar.com/read/ADCD_2.1/Hardware_Manual_guide/node0047.html
It's better like that because the blitter contained in the copper is faster at moving data in memory (it can alway access it while the CPU can only 1 cycle out of 2), and have a higher priority at accessing it (it can deny the CPU the right to access RAM if it has a lot of shifting to do).
>>43182135
IIRC, Amigas have planar VRAM which is the main reason porting Doom to it wasn't viable.
>>43182109
Yeh, PCs have always had the misfortune of being overburdened with backwards compatibility. For example, there's no reason for 40-column text modes to exist on VGA except for CGA compatibility.
>>43181999
These both put the attribute byte in as well although it's not needed.
I was just redirected to this thread so here we go.
>>43182324
You probably should have deleted the other one you made first.
>>43182201
Nope, that's an excuse. Doom run fine on Amigas that aren't Amiga 1000, 500, 600 and unexpended 2000. Remember that these machines use a 7MHz 68000, which is the 680x0 equivalent of the 8086. Go run Doom on a 8086 PC and tell me how fast it runs. Doom needs at least a 386 or even a 486 to run correctly, which in term of 680x0 CPU translate into 68030 and 68040.
Doom running on an AGA-based Amiga with a 68040@33MHz run as fine as on a 486@33MHz based PC: yes, the Amiga render textures 3D scene 3 time slower than a PC, but the 68040 is 3 time faster than the 486 CPU when it comes to Floating point operations, needed when it comes to 3D stuff.
No, the reason why John Carmack said Doom wont run on Amiga is because:
- Brits were all using unexpended Amiga 500
- The game wouldn't be allowed in Germany
- The game will be pirated in Eastern Europe
- Northern Europe and France were switching to PC clones.
Where do you find your old PC gear /retro/?
>>43182339
I don't think you can delete threads anymore.
>>43182346
eBay, Gumtree, Newspaper Classifieds, Flea Markets.
I get an average of about 1 special piece every 2 months.
>>43182343
>Remember that these machines use a 7MHz 68000, which is the 680x0 equivalent of the 8086
It's not really an exact comparison because the 68000 has internal 32-bit registers and a 24-bit address bus, neither of which applies to the 8086. The 286 is closer, but still only 16-bit registers.
>>43182347
>>43182324
If you made this new thread, why are people still posting in that other one?
>>43182400
I'm speaking in term of elderliness in the CPU family. Of course, all 680x0 CPU are superior to their x86 equivalent, the 68060 excepted (if only Motorola really worked on it instead of just screwing it and jumping on the PowerPC train).
>>43182420
Because autism. They'd rather continue to post in there than admit that that was the wrong there.
>>43174957
133MB/s over a SCSI interface. i can barely get that on my sata drive haha
>>43180787
INT 21h Functions 48h, 4Ah, and 4Bh are used for dynamic memory allocation. They reserve a memory segment for the application, the size of which is determined by the number of paragraphs specified in BX (paragraph=16 bytes, the minimum allowed segment size). If allocation is successful, the segment address is returned in AX. When exiting a program with INT 21h Function 4Ch, all allocated memory blocks are freed.
As I mentioned, EXE files by default only allocate as much RAM as the program itself occupies, but COM files for some reason reserve all available conventional RAM unless you use Function 4Ah to reduce it to some smaller value.
>>43182452
Those guys don't want a serious thread, they just want a nostalgic circlejerk.
>>43182473
They didn't remotely reach that back then either, not with their fast-rotating server storage magnets.
Trying to push data through a parallel bus like IDE or SCSI wasn't effective in the long run anyway due to effects like crosstalk and transit time variations.
That's why all parallel busses on the PC (including PCI) have been dead for almost a decade now.
>>43182324
Ah, old-school AOL, where the chat rooms were 80% pedos and the police hadn't even learned that modems existed yet.
>>43181036
Also, if you didn't know, the names of the four main x86 registers designate their principle functions:
>AX
Accumulator
>BX
Base pointer
>CX
Counter
>DX
Data
>>43182680
CP used to be easily found in a few mouse clicks back then.
>>43181036
BP's main purpose is as a secondary stack pointer so you can get data from the stack without disturbing SP.
>>43182581
>As I mentioned, EXE files by default only allocate as much RAM as the program itself occupies, but COM files for some reason reserve all available conventional RAM unless you use Function 4Ah to reduce it to some smaller value
For anyone not familiar with DOS programming, COM files are executables which have no separate data or stack segment; the segment registers are all set to the same value and everything (code, stack, and data) must fit within one 64k segment. For small programs, COM files are convenient since they have a flat memory layout. COM files always begin program execution at offset 100h and have no header information. The stack begins at the top of the segment (offset FFFE) and moves down from there.
EXE files have no size limit (beyond the available RAM space on the PC) and may have multiple code, data, and stack segments. They also contain a header which DOS uses to set up the segments prior to passing control to the program. The stack segment begins at whatever value you set up (so if you set a 512-byte stack, it begins at offset 200h). A separate stack segment is not required, and if you don't set one up, the data segment will be used for the stack (in which case it starts at FFFE)
>>43182346
>dat black and pink dress girl
>>43180921
I guess it depends on what you're used to. One guy might know x86 and PC hardware intimately while finding Amiga and 680x0 like speaking Chinese.
>>43182671
>including PCI
Still find too many motherboards with that. I was looking for one without PCI when buying my new motherboard, but ended up with one with PCI slots anyways since the ones without had fewer SATA ports.
Having too few SATA ports is suffering.
When did ISA slots stop appearing on mainstream motherboards? My Socket 370 board has nothing but PCI and one AGP Pro slot. My Slot 1 board has 3 ISA slots.
>>43183337
Of course, x86 is still relevant today while Amiga and 680x0 are museum pieces.
>>43183460
Most PCs had at least one ISA slot up to the Pentium III and industrial motherboards still sport them.
>>43179989
>, I don't know why I should buy an LCD when this monitor is better than most of them.
Because LCDs have better quality than a 1999 crt.
>>43183483
>Of course, x86 is still relevant today while Amiga and 680x0 are museum pieces
There is no God...
>>43183585
>>43183483
All that proves is the adage that you can sell more peanuts than caviar.
man, i spent too long just using an lcd
got the contrast/brightness balanced out on my 'new' tv hooked up to my computer, and have just setup an 853x480i mode (16:9)
the tv also has a 16:9 geometry mode, meaning i can use the full 480 lines while displaying 16:9 media
even playing hd media on it looks far better than on my average 1080p computer monitor, mainly due to the contrast, it's the middle of the night atm, and i've got hellsing playing... dark scenes leave the room pitch black, but still everything in the scene is clear and visible, and flashes of light colors are blindingly bright at the same time
the hit in resolution is no competition next to the contrast advantage, i don't know how i missed this when moving from a crt pc monitor to lcd
Does anyone have a rip of Encarta from the late 90s? I'd really like to play Mindmaze again.
>>43183693
Go and Google search for an ISO of it.
>>43181005
I was five in 98
>>43183753
6 here
>>43183555
No they haven't.
>>43183555
>shittier contrast
>shittier colors
>black isn't black but grey
>only one resolution displayed correctly
>Sample & Hold
Yeah, they're sure better.
>>43183675
there's really no way to show the way it looks by photo, but it's really a huge difference compared to my lcd
>>43184219
Many CRTs aren't really black either. Seen a few too many bright grey ones. At least they don't blind your eyes when they do try to display a black picture.
My LCD isn't very comfortable at night.
>>43184414
The more colors you have on screen, the blacker it is.
>>43184361
ps, left is a $200 lcd from 2010, right is a $5 tv i got recently, made in 1999
>>43183753
I was old enough to drink
>>43184611
Proving nothing. You could live in Europe where 12 year olds are allowed to have beer.
>>43184675
Were allowed.
>>43184675
>Proving nothing
>implying I'm attempting to prove anything on an anonymous imageboard
>Implying those faggots could prove they were 5 and 6
>>43181093
streetguru?
My grandmother still uses Windows 3.1
>>43186350
She sounds hot. Got any pics?
>>43185453
aw man I've always wanted an XT, just so i look at it.
>>43178616
t-that was me
if you disable javascript you can browse but with no images or posting ability
>>43178666
Those are still bretty good, though, I've just got a 100 MHz R4000, a 540MB disk and IRIX 5.3, which can't run shit.
>>43182346
Thrift store back room, can pick whatever I want out of a dumpster for $5 each regardless of what it is.
Also Craigslist, industrial surplus, work and misc. contacts through friends and family.
Should I email this guy? Apparently it still spins
>>43188328
Nah, what are you going to use that thing for? It's strictly a doorstop.
>>43188580
Well nothing, really. But just look at all those platters!
I sent him my # and offered $100
>>43188802
>>43188328
Wow! It can make a nice trophy anon, or if you're really good, you can make your own IBM System/370 and put it in use.
>>43188802
>>43188328
Meanwhile I just paid $0.25 for a 100MB Zip disk that still works and isn't the size of a boat anchor.
>>43190805
I'm sure it will be a great conversation piece anon.
>>43190869
I'm not certain that I -want- to have a conversation with the kind of person who would be impressed by a big-ass hard drive platter.
>>43180914
same as
move.l 4(a0), d0
move.l 8(a1), d1
it's just indexed addressing.
>>43188328
>100mb hard disk
>It's bigger than an entire desktop today.
It's impressive how far we've come.
If anyone was around for the discussion about HP Vectra systems we were having a couple threads back, I found my gutted 386DX-20 box in a pile of shit while cleaning up the shed and checked out the back, they used standard AT keyboards but HP-HIL mice.
>>43174957
Reminds me of the good old days when I would order Mitsumi blanks at work and use my SCSI CD-R drive in my workstation with CDRWin to copy PS1 games. Good times.
>>43176486
>install OS//2 WARP!
best IBM closed sauce OS evah
>>43174957
Ten year old laptop can barely handle lubuntu, best operating system for it?
has a amd atholon64 processor, and 1 gig of ram.
>>43195469
desktop*
>>43176255
Man, I remember hearing most of these terms from Homestar Runner, man.
Am I not retro yet?
>>43195469
are you wanting to make actual use of it, or do cool retro stuff?
If you want actual use, you might just be better with XP.
>>43195528
XP runs like balls
>>43195555
That's weird. I've had it run fine on far weaker systems.
Unless you're trying to do something like run youtube videos, rather than simpler tasks like old games and such.
>>43195578
I mean I've tried different things.
Diablo 2 runs well, Morrowind, not so much.
>>43195469
Specs?
>>43195911
Amd Athlon64 uniprocessor at like 2.2ghz
856 mbs of ram
I think like 128mb's of vram
2 presata ide drives
>>43195922
2000 or XP FLP
>>43195939
Recommended website for buying retrovidja?
>>43195971
Ebay
GoG
[spoiler]Piracy[/spoiler]
>>43180046
Strictly, am not sure if that counts (I think x86 is considered to start with 80186), but cool anyways.
>>43195469
The usual candidates are debian, slackware, arch, and light weight derivatives.
A source based distros like gentoo and crux can work well (there are others too), but you must be ok with spending hours compiling big packages like Firefox. It took about 2 hours to compile Firefox on my E6300 a year ago and you will need more than 2GB of RAM to do so. Should be easy and cheap to get a 4GB DDR2 set from ebay. I think I paid 20 dollars for my kit. I think you'd be better off with a distro that has precompiled backages if your laptop doesn't support that much RAM.
>>43174957
What's the point of even having this thread if people won't use it and cannot into catalog?
>>43182235
>>43192262
>>43196756
This thread was here almost a day earlier and it isn't for nostalgia shitposting.
>>43196766
And the NeXT thread? Why can that not go in here?
>>43196791
Because this thread isn't about NeXT hardware...?
>>43196798
>Welcome: Windows 1.x-3.x/9x/NT, MS/PC-DOS, OS/2, Classic Mac OS 1-9, Amiga, 8-bit home systems, CP/M, Legacy Unix platforms, anything pre-1999 you can possibly think of
>>43196791
>>43196798
I misread your post, I dunno, he probably didn't see it or know we were doing these things now, what do we have to do with that?
I think it's better as its own thread anyway since it would probably otherwise be drowned out by other discussions.
Aw, let the NeXT faggot have his thread anyway. We'll talk about interesting stuff here instead.
Fuck, does anyone remember the guest account password for www.max1zzz.co.uk?
>>43196849
Starting when?
>>43196849
>win9x and muh DOS gaymes
>more interesting than rare unix hardware
Why are these generals so butthurt about anything remotely associated with Apple or Steve Jobs?
>>43194675
See here. This thread was made on purpose to say Fuck you to me for posting >>43196756
>>43196876
You can't play Bubble Bobble on a Sun workstation, can you? ;)
>>43196876
If someone would like to post a pic of an Apple II running with Jumpman on it, by all means do it.
>>43196907
Last couple postings from people with some pretty nice 68k boxes have been met with angry shitposting a la >>43196849 for whatever reason.
It is easy to forget how poorly 3D games ran on contemporary hardware back then.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia,87-10.html
Anything higher than 640x480 seems unplayable to me now, but I can remember being happy with the way Halflife ran on my Pentium II + Riva TNT. I played with the resolution set to 1024x768.
Last year when I played Mirror's Edge I had to lower the texture quality to stop the framerates from dipping down to 40-50 FPS. I thought the sudden drop in framerate was unbearable.
>>43196880
You can probably play it in an emulator.
>>43196936
>Apple II
>680x0
Derp.
>>43197025
I was talking about old Apple hardware in general though, not just the II.
> Get ahold of a Toshiba Satellite Pro T2155CDS
> 486 DX4 75MHz, 20MB of RAM,
> Drive is wiped
> Currently running Windows 3.1
Where do you guys find drivers for hardware this old?
Toshiba has some on their website, but I can't seem to find audio drivers anywhere, and it's got some sort of goofy ass chipset.
He hates cats http://strawpoll.me/2188636
>>43197046
That can take 28MB total RAM. If you can upgrade it, why not use Windows 95?
>>43197046
Try http://www.vogonsdrivers.com
>>43197070
I already threw a 16MB stick in, so it's at 20MB total.
Don't judge me, I need drivers for muh DOS games. I figure I'd rather run them natively tan use DOSBox.
I could use 95, but that's just more hard drive space being eaten for nothing more than a fancier GUI. I figure the 75MH 486 is probably too slow for DirectX games.
>>43197071
Thank you, I'll give this a shot.
>>43197097
Who says DirectX games? There were lots of 2D titles that ran in 640x480.
>>43197097
>I could use 95, but that's just more hard drive space being eaten for nothing more than a fancier GUI
???
>>43197112
That's true, but I'll still need realmode DOS for games that either don't play well when run under Windows 95, or ones that do, but are close enough to the performance threshhold that the extra layer takes them from playable to unplayable.
I'm considering installing 95 anyway, since I have a PCMCIA ethernet card and it might be fun to dick around with IE5 and see how fast a machine with 20MB of RAM chokes on the modern internet.
>>43197125
>That's true, but I'll still need realmode DOS for games that either don't play well when run under Windows 95
???
Just go into real mode by hitting F8 on the POST beep and selecting Command Prompt Only from the startup menu.
>>43197118
Windows 95 will happily eat anywhere from 50-100MB depending on install options, vs Windows 3.1, which clocks in at less than fifteen.
>>43197137
That would work, but without audio drivers I won't have sound.
>>43197125
My Toshiba Satellite with 8GB of RAM still chokes on the modern internet. Good luck.
>>43197147
I have a Thinkpad with 95 and it does have a DOS sound driver. But in my experience, the only games I've ever tried that don't seem to run well from within Windows are usually CGA/EGA stuff. I never have tried a VGA game that failed to work.
>>43197137
Why go through that when you can boot into a plain MS-DOS installation? I think plain old MS-DOS is a better fit for that computer.
>>43197169
Huh. Maybe I'll give it a shot.
Now my problem is finding a way to install Windows 95 when I can't create bootable floppies.
If I burn a Windows 98 boot cd, then use it for format the drive, then swap it for the Windows 95 cd and start the install will I run into any problems?
>>43197186
Didn't Windows 9x come with a boot floppy you're supposed to start the computer up with and then stick the CD in to install it? I seem to recall that XP was the first version of Windows that could boot from the CD itself and didn't require a floppy.
>>43197174
>>43197046
Look at the ad right here. This laptop was shipped with 95.
>>43197197
I know that; I have an Acer Pentium III laptop that my boneheaded dad installed Linux on. I'd rather have 98, but I don't have the external floppy that came with the thing so can't install it.
There's a connector on the back for either the floppy or a docking station; not sure which.
>>43197097
>I figure the 75MH 486 is probably too slow for DirectX games.
early ones will work alright on that, i used to run them on a 66mhz 486
most intensive game i ran on it was perhaps grand theft auto (1997), it was quite slow, though
>>43197262
Early Pentiums were 75Mhz. Nah, you can run most stuff released before 95 OSR B.
>>43197262
Stuff like the original Tomb Raider should work.
>>43197282
Didn't Tomb Raider require a Pentium to work and not a 486?
>>43197296
For performance reasons. A 75Mhz 486 and Pentium have no real difference for most software (Pentiums have a few new instructions, but nothing used by normal applications)
Not a virtual machine
>>43197197
>I seem to recall that XP was the first version of Windows that could boot from the CD itself and didn't require a floppy.
The Me install CD is bootable. I don't remember if the 98 CD is.
>>43197207
Win95 would be more proper, but most games from that era was for DOS anyways. I'd go with a plain DOS install, unless I needed Windows 95 for something specific (or just to restore the machine to its original glory).
>>43197169
>>43197271
This is a 150Mhz laptop with 95 OSR B, although the onboard video can only use 16/32-bit color at 640x480 so you could not run games like Sanitarium that use 800x600 and 16-bit color.
>>43197317
>The Me install CD is bootable. I don't remember if the 98 CD is
It's not. You need the boot floppy for it.
>Win95 would be more proper, but most games from that era was for DOS anyways
Not after 95 came out, they weren't. Devs switched from DOS pretty rapidly.
>>43197197
It may have, but the only actual version of Windows I have is NT 4.0
I'd just be download and burning a Windows 95 .iso
>>43197322
If it supports 640x480x32, it should also support 800x600x16.
My old AST had 1MB video memory. It was enough for 640x480x32, 800x600x16, and 1024x768x8.
