...
written by Sebastien Bareil, April 17, 2007

I think you should only support the two last or so operating systems. So, in this case, WinXP and Vista 32 and 64-bit. MCE is a good thing also. But, you should drop support for ME (full of bugs anyway) and earlier versions. I'm working on Vista Home Premium 64-bits with an Intel Dual Core 2 Duo with 2 gb of 800Mhz Ram and Project 64 with all the latest files (yes i'm a member) is working almost perfectly. All my games work or almost all of them (i have 40 games). Thank you for your time!

...
written by Bjørnar, April 17, 2007

You should support
Windows 2000 (many use it still)
Windows Xp
Windows Vista
And a Linux and/or Mac version of PJ64 would be nice

...
written by Marcelo Clemente, April 17, 2007

Yeah... I don't think it makes any sense to support any non-NT Windows based version....

...
written by Jay, April 17, 2007

A Linux Version Would Be Nice

...
written by Brian, April 17, 2007

I still use Win2000 and WinXP but I'd like to see it support Windows Vista a little better now that DirectSound has been removed from DirectX 10, the default DirectX in Vista so that makes Jabo's DirectSound plugin not too good in Vista. But I believe that you should at least continue support for Win2000/XP since most people will be sticking with that for quite a while.

...
written by TzakShrike, April 17, 2007

I would like to keep Win2k support, as I only just started running this on Win2k

Prior to this, I have used it primarily with XP, but now I've got a machine dedicated to this purpose, and I'm running Win2k as a compromise between usability (USB2.0, Bluetooth, etc) and speed (older versions of Windows run faster... because they have to).

I don't really want to give up this speed gain (even if it's only minor), however I could cope with having to run XP.

Also, other legacy systems support (95/9 could be useful to some people who further value the speed of the old OSes over, say, their USB2.0 driver stack, so if it isn't too much work, I think they should stay around.

But yeah, 2k at the least, because it's faster (slightly) and supports much the same stuff at the moment.

...
written by darkhawk, April 17, 2007

It should support those OS:
Windows 2000
Windows XP (32bits and 64bits)
Windows Vista (32bits and 64bits)

windows 95/98 if don't too difficult to keep it running on that platforms

...
written by Nekokabu, April 17, 2007

Win98/ME are not necessary.
I would like to keep Win2k support!

...
written by Scott Cochrane, April 17, 2007

Windows 98 is dead, only machines still running it are ones that cannot run PJ64 properly anyway, so kill off support, XP and Vista are all that's necessary.

...
written by Chris, April 17, 2007

All systems running XP (all verions and bits) and Vista....the older systems are not really worth it. Everyone should have at least one person running XP by now, or at least a dual boot.

...
written by Melchior, April 17, 2007

I use Windows 2000... And it could be a long time before I could upgrade to XP (Vista is out of the Question... Too Risky)

I finally got an install of that done and setup in the last 3 months...
So you definitely have to support Win2k XP Vista (yes.. 32bit 64Bit)..


I can run PJ64 not as fast as I would like, but fast enough to get a few games playing.. (More Upgrades to follow. )

PS: I just donated too so it would be ..... a disapointment.. if Win2K was
droped too soon.. Another 2 years at most should do.

Thanks PJ64.

...
written by wes mcdaniel, April 17, 2007

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. And in the case of 9x users: the miniscule. The developers should not waste time bending over backwards to cater to these dinosaurs. If they insist on using 9x, then they can use the perfectly fine 1.6. But the rest of us deserve something better. But a warning before donation needs to happen to inform everyone that 9x is not officially supported anymore.

...
written by Uther_Dark, April 17, 2007

I would LOVE to see support for 2000, I run a computer shop and have many personal machines, but the two operating systems I run the most are 2K and XP (all versions of both) I do have a laptop or two that have 98 but just aren't worth messing with really...with limited driver support for 9x it really shouldn't be worth your time...Also, I'd like to add that I've been using your emulator for a looooong time now and I have to say...STAND UP JOB GUYS *Standing Ovation*

...
written by _Dragon_, April 17, 2007

Hi out there!

Yeah... I don't think it makes any sense to support any non-NT Windows based version....

And why? Many people (just look at gentoo forums; mupen64 makes maaaaannnnyy problems) would like to remove mupen64 and use a good emulator like pj64.

I think droping support is always only acceptable, if it makes to much work keeping it. I'm not that a Pro Developer, but dropping 2k Support, would that even be possible? I mean without adding a checkt that tests on which platform you're running pj64, are there commands that 2k couldn't handle?
Summary:
95/98: Drop if too much work
Win2K: Don't drop.
Linux / Mac (don't think that it would make much work to port between that 2 Platforms): Add support, you would make many users happy with that!


So lon, _Dragon_

...
written by OuT, April 17, 2007

I think you should focus on 2000/XP/Vista...

2000 is still used by many people. As more, it supports Unicode, etc. so keeping 2000 compatibility shouldn't be too hard. Can you give us more details? For exemple, will Project64 depends on the very latest updates of DirectX? Will it depends on MSXML or stuff like that?

Personally, I think (but it's a subject of long debating) you can drop Win9x support. I see more and more developers dropping Win9x support. Win9x is less stable, drivers for it are not made anymore, more and more software don't work on it. Majority of people have left Win9x, because their new hardware, or their favourite software, doesn't work on it.

Finally, a computer which is able to run Project64 with decent quality/speed is also clearly able to run WinXP.

...
written by Eric, April 17, 2007

I think your time is better off spent supporting the newer sytems (3 latest) and adding new features than making it compatable for the old systems (only remove compatability for ones that would be to hard or take to long to keep compatable). If a lot of people want pj64 1.7 for windows 98 you can also just release after the final public release of it is available for the newer systems. The people who use their computers for gaming or project 64 probably have a computer that is newer than 7 years anyways. Also anyone with windows 98 still (like me) can always just download v.1.6

...
written by Danial Horton, April 17, 2007

by removing 9x support, you would be able to optimise the core better for NT's memory handler, which would probably get you between 5-10% performance increase.

...
written by Scipio1, April 17, 2007

Macintosh version would be cool you know how im always talking about it on the beta forums

...
written by Serge, April 17, 2007

I can't imagine what API function not present in 9x you require in the development of pj64.
Please at least don't do anything specifically to drop 9x support.
Danial Horton, what are you talking about? Either you don't have experience as a coder or you talked about some compiler optimizations which isn't the same as dropping 9x support. Sorry for my English.

...
written by Ocean Blue, April 18, 2007

I vote of Windows XP and newer only.

...
written by GaveUpTomorrow, April 18, 2007

Windows 2000, Xp, and Vista. I still use windows 2000, but mostly I stick to XP. Still though, a lot of people still use 2000, and to me, it's one of the best OS's available (much faster than XP at times).

...
written by Joshua, April 18, 2007

Definitely support Win 2000... Most all other companies still do. I wouldn't support 95/98 though as they have been officially ended by Microsoft.

...
written by zilmar, April 18, 2007

smiff wrote:
there isn't really any "Win98 code" to remove and get a magic speedup (there is some Win9x specific code but for things like ini operations where that OS has limitations, not in core emulation) - this is mostly about us no longer having to test every build on so many operating systems. which is a PITA. and as someone above said, so we can be clear about exactly what we support. there is no intention to deliberately break Win9x support either afaik..

...
written by Sam, April 18, 2007

I also think that Windows 2000 should still be supported. A lot of people use it as an alternative to XP because it isn't as much of a resource hog.

...
written by DrLight, April 18, 2007

Win2k and WinXP support should be sufficient for the Windows users (nobody should be forced to use Vista so I wouldn't mind dropping the Vista support efforts :-) ). Also I would be happy to see a Linux / Unix / MacOS port; for example using Winelib.

...
written by Willy Gazina, April 18, 2007

Windows XP and Ubuntu would be nice. Maybe just get it working in wine? It's not hard to test it against winelibs. Of course that means it will PROBABLY run in ReactOS, too...

...
written by RandomMofo, April 18, 2007

i don't give much of a damn about vista, but i'm using win2k and still sticking to it. supporting it should be relatively easy, since XP is merely an overhauled win2k and therefore shares the same core features. on the other hand, i agree that previous windows versions should be just dropped. just my tuppence.

...
written by sean1, April 18, 2007

my two cents?- drop win9x support! thanks guys! keep it up!

...
written by RaphaelZ, April 18, 2007

Oh, the win98/ME/2000 suport is very important!!!!!!

...
written by ludivego, April 18, 2007

I actually use 98 only because it is inside a converted arcade cabinet and at the time it was built 98 was the best idea. I think that it would be cool to support win9x versions, but in all honesty if it takes a lot of time and effort then best to focus on Vista and XP.

Just make the old versions available for people to get at.

...
written by ludivego, April 18, 2007

and linux would be awesome

...
written by xannonite, April 18, 2007

Windows 2000 and XP should definitely be the primary set of operating systems to test with. Vista support is inevitably going to be needed since it's being forced upon society, but the only people I know who use it unwittingly and regrettably purchased a new PC with the OS pre-installed.

As far as Windows 9x goes, I agree that supporting that OS is not necessary. I am only running it on an old Pentium MMX machine that I keep around for old game compatibility (e.g. DOS or FFVII) and web browsing (when my main PC is occupied with a full-screen game like FFXI.) Of course, as was said, there currently isn't a reason for PJ64 not to work on Win9x, but I'm sure that will change as PJ64 becomes more compatible with Vista.

One thing I don't want to see happen is for DirectX 9 or 10 to be required. I think it's best to stick with DirectX 8 as long as video card drivers support it. Either that or switch to OpenGL, which would probably make Linux support easier should that be implemented at some point.

...
written by Scott Cochrane, April 18, 2007

You people on the side of Windows 98 are nuts, why are you still using that outdated piece of crap? It's extremely unstable, it's old, XP is so much better than it in every possible way, heck even windows 2000 is so much better than it in every way.

Drop Windows 98 and get a real OS.

...
written by Scott Cochrane, April 18, 2007

I realize my last comment was a bit harsh but really if you want to keep supporting old operating systems where do you stop, Windows 95? Not to mention the fact that 1964 0.9.9 dropped support for windows 98 a long time ago and nobody cared that much.

As far as I know It is not the goal of Project64 to support Work computers*, arcade cabinets or old computers (or old arcade cab?). All of which are pretty much the only systems still using this operating system.

Most of the computers still running Windows 98 will struggle to run this emulator under normal conditions so I am firmly against supporting it for this reason, why waste time on that when you can focus your resources on your true userbase: 2000/XP/Vista and beyond.

* Someone mentioned in the beta forum about work computers, I laughed my ... head off about that. You're not supposed to play games at work

...
written by Serge, April 18, 2007

Dear Zilmar! Nice to hear that you don't plan to drop 9x support deliberately. Could you please enlighten us upon what API functions introduced in nt you need when programming ini operations.
P.S. Dunno about other countries but in Russia where I reside not less than 10% of PCs operate under 9x.

...
written by Questwizard88, April 19, 2007

I'd say go with 2k and up at least. I don't give the slightest bit of a care in the universe about Vista compatibility, as I'm never upgrading until they get rid of the encryption requirements, requiring a Hotmail acct., DRM, and all that other junk.

...
written by wes mcdaniel, April 19, 2007

I'm with you Questwizard88. I'm using XP Pro until the next OS in 5 years...Vista is nothing but absolute garbage. But I do understand that developers (Zilmer) unfortunately has to waste their time trying to make their software compatable with Vista as people are being forced to use it. So 2000/XP/Vista support.

If Zilmer only has TEN HOURS A WEEK to work on PJ64, I don't want him wasted one second on 98/ME!!!! And all of you 98 users need to realize that and allow him to not waste his precious time for all 6 of you. USE PJ 1.6!!!

...
written by Gent, April 19, 2007

I still Use Win98 but only for PJ64 Testing Purposes as many of the team do not.

My Wife however uses Win2k and will not change it.

So in understand on those grounds that we should consider that some people would prefer to stay with 2k and be a shame to force them to change OS just so they can continue using PJ.

...
written by cjjar, April 19, 2007

ONLY WIN XP PRO and VISTA is BEST than ALL OS SUCKSSS PROBLEM
i not want WINDOW 2000 SUCK PROBLEM!

...
written by Joshua, April 19, 2007

errrr.... well said cjjar.... ... ... >.>

...
written by Danial Horton, April 19, 2007

Windows 98 is unsupported by almost everyone now, so theres no reason pj64 should follow suite

the people using 98 are usually using machines not capable of using the dx8 plugins anyway,

in all reality, the 9x Core isn't good enough to run pj64 due to the way it handles memory and virtual memory.

i had 2 systems setup exactly the same way, except for windows versions, and the NT core was always better at running PJ64 due to the more efficient memory handling.

@ Serge
Windows 9x uses a different code system to 98, and the more bug code in any compilation, the more chance of slowdowns on any system, an example of this is Homeworld 1, which was written for 9x/NT4, yet it runs like ass on XP (which is also NT based)

on the topic of Windows 2000, as long as SP4 is installed, it should be supported.

...
written by Scott Cochrane, April 19, 2007

Smiff I was trying to argue that arcade cabinets and work computers are not the general userbase so therefore should be less important, theres no reason a cabinet cannot use XP though.

...
written by John, April 19, 2007

I would love to see Linux support

...
written by Danial Horton, April 19, 2007

sorry john, thats not happening, not with this team anyway.

...
written by Gent, April 19, 2007

written by Smiff, April 19, 2007

(btw, who in core PJ64 team has Win2000? i don't any more)

Well Pixi Still has it Smiff so i guess i still have access to Win2000

and yea i have kept 98 testing lol and me and jabo did establish a while back the last d3d8 that did work

...
written by Rex, April 19, 2007

Yeah drop tha s**tty ass versions of Windows.. there outdated and should have been dropped a long time ago.. You guys should only keep Windows XP and Vista.

...
written by carl, April 19, 2007

Windows XP and Windows Vista support only.
Win98 is obsolete.
Windows 2000 is not for gaming

...
written by Jabo, April 19, 2007

@Gent - I was waiting in the wings for you to come by about the win98, I thought I'd lure you out ;-)

...
written by _Dragon_, April 19, 2007

@Smiff: You forgot Linux
And for the ppl saying Linux is not for gaming:
a) Change it and make games for Linux like id does
b) Thats not true! Look at PCSX2, epsx, Mupen64(ok, bad example... very bad example ) and all Games for linux!

...
written by Shawn Cermak, April 19, 2007

that is not what they are saying

...
written by wes mcdaniel, April 19, 2007

Sakarin, shut up! It's 20$ bucks to have the priviledge to beta test. In a year or so, it'll get relesed to the public for free. I'm so tired of this idiotic debate. Use PJ1.6 then damnit! What is this self-entitlement bulls**t?

...
written by NightKitty, April 20, 2007

I say stick with 2000 . Sure it might be nice to have 98/ME support. The problem is that the team has limited resources. They have to budget those resource in such a way to get the most out of them. The number of people using 98/ME is much, much smaller than the XP community. The 2000 community is as well, but it is still an NT kernel and is still supported, at least partially, by Microsoft (unlike 98 and ME). No matter what someone's personal opinion on Vista is, people will migrate to it as they replace their computers. Support for it will effectively be a requirement eventually, so they might as well get started now. If they skip this OS generation entirely (which someone suggested but I find highly unlikely), it will only make it that much harder next generation and could also significantly reduce their userbase in time. If you are only going to support 2 go with XP and Vista. XP because pretty much everyone uses it, and Vista because, like it or not, pretty much everyone will use it eventually.

...
written by Gent, April 20, 2007

Well if we are going to say dump 9x and keep with NT (2K) then i guess i can finally get rid of 98 and build a vista box, the only thing stopping me was pj testing.

That would mean i will have:

Win2K
XP
Vista

I just hope all concerned wanting to keep 9x support in will use this time to speak up or forever hold their peace

...
written by Twisty, April 20, 2007

Would just like to add my vote too for a Linux version. Now that would definitely be a good thing! Is it a consideration for the team, or just not an option? Let us know, please.

...
written by RockmanForte, April 20, 2007

I think you guys should supports all windows because not all people wants vista you know.

...
written by Bob the Builder, April 20, 2007

Drop ME and 98. There is no reason to keep on doing those OS's. Everyone who still uses ME or 98 are dimwits. Drop those two, but keep 2000.

...
written by Michel Kenny, April 20, 2007

I say drop anything older than Windows 2000 for sure. If you want to drop 2000 go ahead too It's better to spend your time getting it to work on XP/MCE/Vista since that's what most people use.

...
written by AVarner, April 20, 2007

Don't support Vista. If you do, your condemning your soul to hell. Supporting Windows Vista is supporting evil. Use Windows XP - the lesser of two evils. A Linux version would be appreciated too.

As for old versions of Windows, 2000 shouldn't be too hard because it has most of the API's that XP had. No one uses Windows 98 anymore, except for playing games in DOS mode.

...
written by maybe, April 21, 2007

3 versions

**Ultimate Project64 for Win9x (and no continuo, maybe only bugfixes, no reason to keep on doing those OS's.-win200, win95, win98, winme)

**project64 for Windows


**and Linux version :-)

...
written by Christophe Philippi, April 21, 2007

Use Vista developpement ,but Xp is not dead too !
thanks to author jabo to develop plugin video for vista
thanks PJ64 team

...
written by Eduardo Rodrigues dos Santos, April 21, 2007

I think it's not worth to keep Win9x support at this point. As said before, people that can run the emu already have at least a Windows 2000 OS.

You should focus on Win2k/XP/Vista development, as they are the most popular these days.

...
written by D, April 21, 2007

Still support for Win2000, please. I use it and like it.

...
written by asawin88, April 21, 2007

damn spammers.

I would say optimise pj 64 1.7 for vista

...
written by Zufomec, April 21, 2007

Dont optamize for anything in perticular

but support everything you can, right back to win 95 if ya really want

and all you people who say vista is best, and dont support crappy old win98

have non of you noticed how the system requirements for vista are nearly twice as much as xp . and xp is more than twice as much as 98 . .its not because their better, its because win98 and win95 (also know as Windows NT . . cant remember what numbers tho) and XP AND vista and all versions of windows since 3.11 are based on windows NT, and any of the later versions while able to support bigger drives and more ram due to the 48bit addressing system are not much better than the erlier versions except by their fancy graphics and ability to make your computer even slower than the last version did

soooo

support for 98 up would be good (considering it and win 2000) are still the fastest windows OS' out there

linux and mac support would be good too

...
written by xannonite, April 21, 2007

ehh, it is not true that all versions of Windows since 3.11 are based on NT. Windows NT was a different product line. It wasn't until after Windows 2000 was released that Microsoft consolidated to a single Windows product line.

Windows 95, 98, and Me all use 16-bit and 32-bit code. Windows 2000 and XP are based on NT, which does not use 32-bit code. That's why it's difficult or impossible to run 16-bit applications on those operating systems.

Windows 9x may have much lower system requirements than 2000 or XP, but it's also not as capable as its successors. It suffers from unstable drivers, problems related to its 16-bit code, lack of new hardware support, etc.

Windows 2000 and XP are both pretty much the same at the core, though XP is more stable and has better hardware support. XP's system requirements are higher because it's GUI is more bloated than 2000's. If you turn all of that off, it's just as fast as 2000 (or even faster in some cases.) XP does need more memory no matter what, though. Windows 2000 would be the OS of choice if you only had 128-256MB of RAM.

Vista is just a monstrosity. Its minimum requirements for Premium/Business/Ultimate are about eight times those of Windows XP. Even if you exceed the minimum requirements, the OS is dreadfully slow, and the new interface is enough to drive a user mad. Things that used to be easy to get to are now buried with extra steps and endless pop-ups.

...
written by xannonite, April 21, 2007

Correction: NT does not use 16-bit code.

p.s. There needs to be an edit button for comments.

...
written by Gamer1, April 22, 2007

I would say drop win9x support. Anyone with hardware capable of actually running PJ64 has long switched over. Or should migrate their old machines to Linux.

It has been 6 years since I personally used windows 98 and I don't see anyone in their right mind going back to or should be using that OS anytime soon. All the hardware enthusiast that I know (myself included) have gone to Windows 2000.

My AthlonXP 3200 with a 9800pro still runs windows 2000, and I would have all of my machines run windows 2000, except for the fact that it doesn't support Hyper-Threading or Dual-Core.

I personally love Windows 2000. I think it's Microsoft's best OS. It's extremely stable, runs super fast on my 667Mhz Celeron unlike Windows XP, and it's not bloated. The only machine that I have windows 98 installed on is my old Sony VAIO with a 200Mhz Pentium, but even that machine isn't _running_ windows 98 anymore, it's now running Linux.

I'm currently dual booting xp/ vista/ ubuntu right now on my main machine. But please... don't drop windows 2000 support.

*I know this isn't the proper forum but we need more great emulators for the linux platform.

...
written by Zufomec, April 22, 2007

good point xannonite, my bad. But . . all windows os' since 3.11 are virtually the same, and xp is suposedly a merge of the 9x and NT lines in which they took the NT side of things and dropd the 16-bit code

my point is, if your partial to old games such as the ones this emulator is designd for and definatly produced arround that time, surely you'd have a pc with one of the older (16-bit included) operating systems, probably win 98, which can cope with the high power required for an emulator such as this but can also run all those other nice old games that you have, that were all designd to run in DOS and win95, and the comlete lack of backwards compatibility of XP and Vista stops you from doing

...
written by Ubuntu Man, April 22, 2007

Spread the greatness of pj64 to Linux! Linux has my vote.

...
written by Tim the toolman, April 22, 2007

I really do believe pj64 should be on Linux also. Linux is being more widely used now. Hope to see a Linux version soon!

...
written by Kizul Emeraldfire, April 23, 2007

So in understand on those grounds that we should consider that some people would prefer to stay with 2k and be a shame to force them to change OS just so they can continue using PJ.

One could say the exact same thing about Windows 98. Some people just like using it.

Also, at those of you saying that it's "ZOMG RIDIKYULUZLY UNSTABL!11!111!!!one" — I haven't had a Blue Screen of Death in MONTHS. My Windows 98SE comp is QUITE stable.

I may get Windows XP in the future, but at the moment I don't have room for another hard drive in my computer, and I like Windows 98SE and don't want to overwrite it with XP.

Anyway, I would very much appreciate it if Windows 9x support was kept.

...
written by caqde, April 23, 2007

I use XP and am going to eventually upgrade to Vista Business 64-bit when I upgrade my computer (64bit because of the 4gb page limit of a 32bit OS). But I say there should be support for at least XP and Vista (32 and 64bit eventually).

Kizul, I am guessing that you do not have more than 512mb of ram and do not have a hard drive bigger than 137gb? When you do upgrade going over these amounts will cause win98SE to become unstable. Actually from what I have read putting 1GB of ram into a system normally caused 98 to not start at all.

xp is suposedly a merge of the 9x and NT lines

Actually all Microsoft did with XP is take Windows 2000 add a few features that would make it "attractive" to the average user and from there improve the emulation of the Win9X line of software including the old 16bit line of software. When XP first came out it was really no better than Windows 2000 it wasn't until SP1a and SP2 that XP started to really shine although that was mainly because Microsoft didn't patch 2000 to include some of the fixes included in those Service packs.A major change that hurt 2k users that is in XP is the 137gb HardDrive support during installation aka LargeLBA in the 2k registry (PARTITIONING does not HELP).

until they get rid of the encryption requirements, requiring a Hotmail acct., DRM, and all that other junk.

QuestWizard88, Requiring a hotmail account? what? Encryption requirements?? are you talking about HDCP? If Microsoft didn't put that in more customers would be angry.. The junk I kinda understand, but it won't keep me from moving to it.. DRM... well I just hope the world becomes sane later, but in vista it isn't implemented to the point of mutiny yet. And if you use are going to use a highend PC I wish you luck, because a 32bit OS doesn't support more than 4gb RAM (Videocard and CPU memory COMBINED ex: 2gb ram 512mb videocard = 2.5gb RAM to the OS)

One thing I don't want to see happen is for DirectX 9 or 10 to be required.

Xannite, are you talking hardware or software? A software requirement shouldn't hurt you to much as downloading new software isn't too hard not to mention it is available for all the OS's listed including 98 apparently... A hardware requirement isn't likely as I'm pretty sure the N64 doesn't need the capabilities that DirectX 9 and/or 10 require and also note since it is going to be compatible with XP DirectX 10 support would only be for Vista and would likely be a separate coding path or a plugin.

DirectSound has been removed from DirectX 10

Brian, Actually it was removed from DirectX 9 in it's Vista implementation believe it or not. DirectX 10 does NOT support 9 and below so in Vista DirectX 9 and 10 are separate entities altogether. This is what is causing all of the problems with DirectSound in Vista.

...
written by Zufomec, April 23, 2007

thats quite right caqde

"I use XP and am going to eventually upgrade to Vista Business 64-bit when I upgrade my computer (64bit because of the 4gb page limit of a 32bit OS). But I say there should be support for at least XP and Vista (32 and 64bit eventually)"

so hopefully microsoft or some other company will come out with an OS that actually works, doesnt eat up most of your system and make it seem that little bit less worthwhile AND is based on 64bit

untill then i (and probably many others) am glad to be stuck with the 4Gb page limit . . im not entirely sure but i think my 2Gb of ram and 512Mb of graphics memory giving a total of 2.5Gb to the os is plenty for any of my gaming needs, and anyone elses for that matter . . i have yet to come accros a game that doesnt work fine on my system, even tho its comparativly old

oh and if any of you have tried that wounderful 64bit XP (havnt even botherd with vista, seems too much like a waste of time) you will probably have noticed that alot of hardware doesnt work properly, alot of programs dont work properly . . and in general the system doesnt work properly. basically, 64bit is a new thing, and whiles component producers are all up and ready for it, most software engineers arn't. any console is a perfect example of how this works, console first comes out, lots of fancy looking games for it (seeing how its the best thing on the market at the time), you give it a couple of years and games programmers will be coming out with stuff hundreds of times better for the same console . .why? . . because it takes time for the full capabilitys of any new technology to be realised.

...
written by Robert, April 23, 2007

I used pj64 under windows2000 and windowsXp
i think is not necessary the win9x compatibility
i vote for the compatibility with only NT based systems (2000,xp,vista)

i'm sorry but recently i've upgraded my operating system to linux and i cannot run pj64. support to linux would be very appreciated.
I hope to see a linux version

thank you
you've made a good emulator

...
written by Javin, April 24, 2007

Why not just continue to "support" Win'98 but don't test the platform. If '98 users run into trouble, let them be your beta testers/trouble shooters. You say the problem with '98 has nothing to do with API, or core programming, but more about just testing on each platform. You can continue to ATTEMPT '98 support, but don't beat yourself up over it. Let those using '98 that want to use PJ64 let you know if something breaks. Best of both worlds.

...
written by lewislite, April 24, 2007

XP and Vista only please. Windows 2000 and below, it's time to upgrade

...
written by Me, April 25, 2007

Instead or working with no Nt Systems why don't you start working in a linux version? windows98SE, milenium, 95, they are all dead.

...
written by Your grasp of English < a 3rd grader, April 25, 2007

I think you guys should make people pass a grammar/spelling test before allowing them to post.

That said, f**k Win 98. The narcissistic bastards that want you to cater to their needs at the cost of everybody else can go f**k a pig (while admiring themselves in a mirror).

...
written by xiphi, April 25, 2007

I think only XP and Vista(x64 and x86) should be supported. Anyone running earlier versions is just asking for trouble since MS no longer supports Win2k/98/ME.

Also, for those who are confused about Vista's drm, directsound and such...

The DirectSound was removed from hardware to reduce the amount of system crashes due to bad drivers. Now all sound is rendered in software. The only way sound can be rendered through hardware is to have an OpenAL supported soundcard.

As far as DRM in Vista goes, DRM only allows you to PLAY DRM protected content. It does not prevent you from playing your current collection of movies/music/videos.

Driver support has so far proven to be good in Vista, from me and my friends experiences. The same can be said about application support. With that said, not all applications will work on Vista.

In the end, I do hope that DirectX10 can help better PJ64.

pz

...
written by Luppus, April 25, 2007

I agree with xiphi
XP is now becoming old but 98 and older versions are getting archaic
PJ64 should only be compatible with vista and XP and we're all fine

...
written by Sebastián, April 26, 2007

Well, I think that a Linux port would be excellent, but better it would be if ALL of the source code would be released. Maybe someone with some of time would port it to another platforms, and not limited to Linux only. And if to drop or not to drop Win 9x support, well my opinion is do what ever you want. By the way, from Win 9x to Vista those (can I say operating systems?) things are just crap.

...
written by ko, April 26, 2007

first i'd like to say great job on p64 and i wish the best.

if dropping 98/2k/etc support results in more resources that could make p64 better then it should happen. for the long term it's the best.

i'd hate to see supporters of older OSes whine and convince you guys to put the effort to support the older OSes because later it'll come back to haunt you when they upgrade in the future and then complain about why things don't work in Vista.

...
written by Jackson, April 26, 2007

I know we've already been told to stop talking about Linux, but I think a lot of people really would be ecstatic about a Linux version of Project 64. I'm one of them.

...
written by Nekurakami, April 28, 2007

Vista is agendaware with no substantial improvement over XP. It looks better. OOOHH! WOW! What a compelling reason to buy an unfinished, DRM-infested, broken, bloated OS for a totally unreasonable price. Windows 2000 and 98 on the other hand are legitimate operating systems that people still use. I used Windows 98 until about 2004 because I couldn't stand all the useless bulls**t stuffed into XP (dog in search bar, stupid GUI, inflated start menu, unnecessary services that run by default like Portable Media Serial Number, Automatic Updates, Indexing Service, Remote Registry, PSMP, IMAPI, BITS, Error Reporting, Fast User Switching, Telnet (who even uses telnet anymore when there's ssh?), etc.).

Vista contains an inordinate amount of unnecessary BS (~10GB worth), is horribly buggy, DRM/TC-ridden, and DX10 does not support a lot of good things that DX9 did in order to more effectively enforce DRM (i.e. no more hardware accelerated audio). Vista forces you to use Microsoft's proprietary filesystems and I could go on for about a week about other reasons why I'm never in my life going to use vista. I'd rather use Fedora Core, SUSE, Windows 2000/98 or even (god forbid) ME. I'd take a bash prompt any day over an overpriced corporate agenda conglomeration with Aero slapped on top of it.

I'd very much appreciate continued support of Windows 2000/98 along with, or better yet instead of support for Vista. Vista was a failure from conception, or as the FSF has aptly said, "Defective by Design".

Thanks a lot and keep up the excellent work. On my next pay check, I'm planning on donating something in the area of $100 to this project (I'm not rich, either :-/).

Cheers, Nekurakami

...
written by .:b{X}s:.CQ, April 28, 2007

Can someone explain to me where the debate is now so I don't have to read all the post above

...
written by Nekurakami, April 28, 2007

I know i'm beating a dead horse and I've probably already said more than my share about this topic, but honestly more people use Linux than Vista, and Vista hasn't exactly been an astonishing success. I just don't see the reasoning behind putting hours into making PJ64 vista compatible when it's quite an inconsequential matter considering how many people actually use it and how there are more important things the time could go to (netplay, variable framerates for games, whatever). It's your project obviously and you will do with it what you want. Like ko said, if dropping 98 support will lead to more time spent on more important things, sure go for it. Oh well. Unlike ko said though, there are a whole lot of people who are utterly unimpressed by vista and have no intention of "up"grading until they are absolutely forced to. Adding vista support is a waste of time. Using vista at all is a waste of time and other resources. I did install a copy (I didn't wast money on) on a Athlon X2 5200 with a 7900GT and 1GB of DDR2-800. It still managed to run things slowly. It also took about an hour to install the 10 to 11 GB of s**t I'll never use or see the justification of.
And to clarify:
Yes, I've used Vista. I'm not impressed and many people share my sentiments.
Yes I know those unnecessary services can be shut down. It's still ridiculous.

No, I'm not trashing Windows XP. It's much more stable than 98 and below and supports a lot more devices. It's all around "better". Unfortunately, if you can't even use the damn thing without constantly being accosted by asinine animated vermin and asked inane questions like "Do you want to search Windows Update for the driver?" (yeah, right) with the choices of "Not now", "Yes", and "always" (where the hell is "never"?), it becomes more of a pain to use than something that has a Christmas light effect if one program crashes.

Yes I know that the DRM in vista allows you to play DRM'd files and doesn't restrict other files. Part of the problem is that the more mainstream support DRM gets, the more incentive there is to use it.

What I'm more worried about is the Trusted Computing garbage that vista was designed from the ground up to support. My computers take orders from ME. Not some asshat in a suit at Microsoft or any other corporation or entity. While they will always try to pass it off as a way to ensure more "security", it's actually an enormous opportunity to lock out undersirable (from MS's standpoint, not yours) software.

I've said enough and gone horribly off-topic. My main point is that from all of my experience with vista and the literature I've read about it, my conclusion is that Vista is simply an operating system without any legitimate purpose. It's the obligatory new windows from Microsoft that everybody's just expected to eventually adopt. That's it. My opinion is that there are more productive things that can be done with PJ64. And as for the DX10 argument, although I'm no expert on graphics APIs, it seems to me that even DirectX 8 is overkill for N64 graphics. There's only so much you can actually do with the models, lighting and textures that are built into the game, am I right?

If adding Vista support really isn't a problem, go for it. I'd just hate to see 1.7 delayed further in the name of supporting a trash OS. Considering that there's a whole topic about support for operating systems though, I'm assuming a lot would have to go into it.

...
written by xiphi, April 29, 2007

I'm sorry Nekurakami, but many don't feel the same way you do. Many are already using Vista. Anyone who has actually USED it have returned positive results. Unlike the nix and mac fan boys, who just take any chance to bash another os just cause they don't like it. If you don't like it, that's fine. But you get no respect by stating false information. Just like on the system you claimed to have installed Vista on, a pc like that should have installed in 15-20 minutes. I would know, because I have a pc that has an amd x2 3800 and vista installs in 20 minutes.

Take your propaganda back to FSF and keep it there. No one wants to hear it.

...
written by Nekurakami, April 29, 2007

You have obviously never installed Vista then, or installed a much more compact/crippled version. I wasn't using a superfast hard drive at the time, but even so, I can transfer 10-11GB to that drive in a lot less time than it took to install vista. It was Vista Ultimate 64 bit. 15-20 minutes is ridiculous. Oh and BTW, PLENTY of people who have used vista don't like it.

http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/19/202251
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/04/1717237
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/31/2317222

To make a comment like, "Anyone who has actually USED it have returned positive results." is not only a naive generalization, but absolutely false, as even one person using it and not liking is means that statement is wrong. I'm not interested in turning this discussion in to a flamewar or anything, but as far as false information goes, you really don't have a leg to stand on. I'll at least admit I have a bias.

...
written by Finnish Enthusiast, April 29, 2007

I suggest that you only support Win 2K/XP/Vista for the time being. I'd like to see what fun you can do with DX10 or latest OpenGL.

Win 95/98/ME is dead. You have perfect PJ64 1.6 for those last 98SE flag wavers. So spare yourselves from the wasted effort of supporting those OS:es.

Linux on the other hand is so light and great for every one, be it older or newer system. Ubuntu is collecting users faster than Vista. So I'd suggest you put a lot of effor to Linux version. (Free hint: Make one quick)

...
written by Nekurakami, April 30, 2007

Hey, sorry to be a pain

...
written by hey!!!!!! dont drop windows 2000, April 30, 2007

i know Windows 2000 is a buiseness OS but,
windows 2000 is much like xp and it is run on NT just like xp. i think you should drop support for the MSDOS operated systems though like 98,98se, and the worst ME(gag) . last time i checked 98 wasnt supported by microsoft and im sure that me will be the next to go if microsoft didnt drop it already.if you drop any of them keep the NT systems but drop the MSDOS SYSTEMS,
ME(gag)

...
written by JasonKnight, April 30, 2007

Well, I currently have 2 Computers hooked up right now.

One computer is a Windows 2000 Machine and the other is a Vista Home Premium machine. My Windows 2000 Machine is hooked up to my TV and that is where all of my emulation runs from. As you can see here

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i27/JasonKnight298/Vista_CLone.jpg

I understand that screenshot looks like Vista, but its not... its really WIndows 2000 using a program called Aston Shell to make it look like vista.

Anyway, I would love continued support for this Operatoing system since I have already tryed installing XP on this system and it causes nothing but problems while playing heavy 3D games (Project 64 included) but I experence no such problems with Windows 2000.

...
written by Gayman, April 30, 2007

I suggest dropping 98,me,2000,ect. Keep XP, Vista, maybe 2000 but screw me 98 and say f**k 95.

...
written by PgtTurbo, April 30, 2007

Most computers that are running Windows 2000 and higher are most likly going to have the required system requirements to run the emulator. Where as Windows 95 and 98 where mostly used during the time of Processors being below 1.0GHz and when we were still using slow ass SD-RAM. Drop WIN95/98/ME and stick with Win2kPro, XP (all Editions) Vista (all editions)

...
written by jean945, April 30, 2007

I think you should support XP/Vista and 2000 not to sure cause it's not that one half of the world uses 2000. Now everyone uses XP. Making it compatible to 2000 could take more time to make the 1.7 release. The only thing is that it has to run in 128mb RAM computers!

...
written by slimshady007, April 30, 2007

keep Windows 2000 (many computers from '99 through XP's release run Windows 2000 better than XP but still have good enough hardware), XP, and (of course) add Vista

...
written by Kenichi340, May 01, 2007

Keep supporting Windows 2000, XP and add Vista.

...
written by deke, May 01, 2007

mmm these older os is really underated i was a xp user but pc crashed ...got windowsa me and ill never go back to xp now.but i dont program on it do what you want.here would be a os i would use when its complete for a xp subsitute called reactos.

...
written by deke, May 01, 2007

by the way isnt 2000 xp the same in a nut shell ? like 98 me?

...
written by deke, May 01, 2007

another comment jabos jnes is really great!!

...
written by david, May 01, 2007

XP and Vista. That's all that matters.

...
written by Sebastián, May 01, 2007

Well, days ago I wrote about Linux support and became open source. I found something interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_64_games
Now I think that the challenge should be make a checklist of all of the 396 games released for the Nintendo 64 and then try to support all of them (Trying to work perfectly). Later decide about the rest, Linux port, to Vista or not to Vista, Mac or not.
What do you think guys?

...
written by advenT, May 03, 2007

I use windows 2000, and don't have any plans to change to XP currently... It's a very stable version of windows and uses very little resources in comparison to XP/Vista... also viruses are no longer extensively directed toward it. I would appreciate it if you guys continued to support 2k in your next releases.

...
written by kHound, May 03, 2007

I'd actually suggest keeping support for Win98,98SE and ME: this is because N64 was an old unit and a fair number of the folks into emulation use, they use older OS's.. I can't justify Win95 though....

though I'd prefer Linux support over 9x if that choice had to be made.

...
written by Zyan, May 04, 2007

I think you should drop support for the Win98/ME, but not for Win2000.

I can guess the difficulty, but a Linux/Mac port would be very appreciated!
Wine couldn't be helpful in this case, because PJ64 uses DirectX.. so only Cedega can execute the emulator. Am I right?

...
written by DJ MindPhreak, May 04, 2007

Dont Drop 2000, its still a good os and is actually the best for running PJ

...
written by pog, May 05, 2007

will vista support the Nintendo 64 controlers

...
written by Majin Vegeta, May 06, 2007

Yes, I think too:
You should make the Emulator Win2k compatible, but the older systems are too old to keep the compability.
So...
You should support:
Windows 2000
Windows XP
and Vista

...
written by Andrew, May 07, 2007

First of all you have a really great program, with an easy to use interface.
I Think that Windows 9x probably should be dropped due to functionality issues, but keep 2k and later.
Also Linux would be awesome.

...
written by Mahv, May 08, 2007

Honestly, most people already dislike Vista. I know a lot of people who, when they get their new computers are going to delete Vista and install 2000. Dropping support for 200 would be a major upset and you would lose a lot of different customers. Personally, I don;t like windows at all. I use a mac, but I read up on things like this and in my opinion it would be the worst move you could make to drop support for 2000 and possibly 98. Besides, if you could ever get around to installing pj64 on vista because of all the secruity warnings, you would probably end up having to stop your game 5 minutes in because your computer would ask "you have pushed "up arrow key" for more than 5 seconds, is this correct?". lol. Anyways, that;s an outsiders opinion.

-Mahvimcoo

...
written by lion10, May 09, 2007

Really great, Smiff why you (or one other of the pj64 team) haven't inform the public about your Win9x/ME/2k drop plans a little bit earlier? Since Dez 2006 I and several others worked intensively with rabiddeity to make the completely revised NRage Input-Plugin Unicode and Win9x/ME ready... (http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?t=36135) Now well, if the legacy Win32 support needs really so much of work and time then drop it, if it's not such a complex thing then let it be!

...
written by Chris, May 09, 2007

Vista (32-bit, 64-bit), XP (32-bit, 64-bit), Xp media center, win2k.

You should start considering linux versions - linux is on the rise.

...
written by chugger1992, May 12, 2007

I think you should keep Win2k support, but drop 9x support. If your computer is old enough to have those OS's, you probably won't be unning an EMULATOR on them

...
written by everton, May 12, 2007

Is possible migrate code for pj64 for LINUX UBUNTU?

I like play this emulator in linux (not using wine).

thanks.

...
written by Danno, May 14, 2007

Hey, here's an idea - since there are a lot of people who want a linux version (I'm no exception!), maybe you could release the source code to another devteam and let them do the work? The code for PJ64 is probably highly proprietary, so it would likely need work (especially for plugins), but hey! Lots of people are whining about it, so let them (us?) fix our own problem! Just an idea...

...
written by Anonymous, May 15, 2007

Oh man, the suspense is KILLING me! When will the Vista version be released? It feels like it's been weeks since you guys announced the project...

...
written by Danno, May 15, 2007

Download link above "account login" . Down with Vista! Blech.. I've heard nothing but bad reviews from the folks at my job, and I worked at Microsoft.

...
written by West, May 16, 2007

Quote:
written by Bjørnar, April 17, 2007

You should support
Windows 2000 (many use it still)
Windows Xp
Windows Vista
And a Linux and/or Mac version of PJ64 would be nice
:End Quote

I very much agree with him and what he said, however I feel that Mac support is not nearly as needed as Linux. People using emulators are much more likely to be using Linux/Windows than a Mac.

Also, why bother to make sure 1.7 works with 98 or ME. For starters they are both not used very often. I would go as far to say that ME is not used, period, as the OS is basically unusable. Also 1.6 will still be available for download, so its not like you haven't provided an emulator for them.

I am using vista ultimate 64-bit, and 1.6 and 1.7 work for me. (just putting that out their)

...
written by West, May 16, 2007

p.s.
VISTA IS GREAT! As long as your P.C. can actually run it, its wonderful. Features are great, it runs faster than XP on my main desktop (and also on my laptop).

...
written by The Wise Man, May 17, 2007

Oh pleaseget a linux version plz plz I have tryied every other 64 emulator for linux nowhere near as good a project64 trust me!!!

...
written by Rodrigo, May 17, 2007

I really think it would be good to cut off win98.
Also, I don't know if it's possible or too much work, but maybe if ther was DOS version of Project, it would be easir for OS to use it

...
written by Pontius Laurentius, May 19, 2007

I got Vista Home Premium 64-bit, works fine for me. I wonder how fast an actual 64-bit build would go...

Works great already.

...
written by Silencer, May 20, 2007

I am using Windows Vista Home Premium 64 Bit.
The 32 Bit emulation part works fine, but as
soon as I open any ROM Vista says there is a
problem with the program and forces me to shut
it down. Probably PJ64 is using some Windows
function that was removed or changed in Vista.
Oh and where I am just going to add a comment
on the internet: Do not buy Vista it is gay.
Just wanted to warn anyone who is going to buy it.

...
written by radorn, May 21, 2007

Win2000 support is important to me xD, for now at least...
I plan get into XP with some custom version (the complete package is loaded with too much s**t for my taste) of it someday, since so many things I'm interested in are getting their w2k support dropped.
For me, I would love all this planned obsolescence crap wasn't done, but I guess one can't but deal with it, as there's no real viable alternative right now (and yes, I migrated completelly to linux, and stayed there a whole year without touching windows... the more I knew about linux the less I liked it and the less I believed it's superiority... For what I care, they are equally crap, and at least in windows I can have some fun without dealing technically with attrocious OS desing or absence there of).

If you drop w2k, it's just one more reason to "update" after so much time. I would need to buy a better computer to take advantage of the new and exciting stuff anyway, so why not update along the way???

...
written by SH4RK B1T3, May 21, 2007

PJ64 team, use common sense. Trying to appease the lowest common denominator is simply bad policy. You, and us the majority, should not have to pay for someone else's laziness of not wanting to upgrade their system. Forget about the 95, 98, and ME hobos, and just get it work with XP and Vista. The only reason XP should get compadibility is because Vista is a steaming pile of crap ATM.

...
written by Delta Dreamer, May 22, 2007

"Why not just continue to "support" Win'98 but don't test the platform. If '98 users run into trouble, let them be your beta testers/trouble shooters."

I'm in! This guy has the right idea. I've kept 98SE purring like a kitten since 2002 (cloned across 3 HDDs, and 3 MOBOs). I'm sure other Advanced Users will accept the challenge! Please, restrict Noobs from flaming old dogs, and only let Users who 'know' their OS vote on this subject. Regardless, I will continue to use PJ64 versions 1.4-1.6. Thanks, for the best N64 emulator!

...
written by J, May 22, 2007

a linux version would be AMAZING

...
written by fredobedo, May 23, 2007

indeed, macosx and linux versions would be super! Those OS are amazing !!

...
written by David, May 23, 2007

Yes Windows 2000 support is important! Please don't drop it! It is still the best version of Windows and the only version I will run. A rock solid OS

...
written by Marco, May 24, 2007

Here's another vote for Linux/Mac as I run a linux server at home and travel with OSX. Choices for N64 emulation on OSX are pretty skimpy, though what there is is not bad.

...
written by Delta Dreamer, May 25, 2007

"written by Smiff". "because PJ64 has always been a Windows emulator. porting to Linux would be a major task."

No disrespect, but can ya'll read the above quote? I'm sure Linux and Mac OS-X are fine operating systems, but unless someone volunteers to write the appropriate Ports, this is non-discussion, IMHO.

Besides, I believe one of the Dev team members already asked us to keep this focused on 'Windows' versions. Am I correct?

Someone, please correct me if i'm wrong, but won't Vista's lack of support for DirectSound make it difficult to support it AND all of the OSes preceeding it (ie. NT/98/98SE/ME/2000/XP)?

If so, maybe a 'Vista ONLY' sound Plug-in could solve that problem.

Oh yeah, Noobs; this smart "hobo" has Win98SE running on a AMD Athlon 1700 at lightning speed, with PJ64. I suggest you not make asumptions about what can, or can't be done, until you have tried it yourself. Of course, i'm talking to people that suggest a full re-install, when they get a fatal BSOD {sigh}.

Hey Dev team, I think ya'll should focus on the Core emulation, that's what's important. As long as the Plug-in specs remain compatible, I could still use the older Plug-ins with the new Core. Am I wrong?

...
written by Z, May 25, 2007

Please keep 98 support I'm too poor/cheap to upgrade

...
written by HeadHunter2, May 26, 2007

Support only:

Windows 2000
Windows XP (f**koff MCE!)
Windows Vista with Special Sound Plugin

...
written by mmatt, May 27, 2007

I know it won't do any good, but I'm throwing my lot in with the Linux crowd here, because we need developers to start taking it seriously. It's a growing market, I know I'd donate for a native Linux version.

...
written by Brian Kyuubi no Kitsune, May 29, 2007

i think you should support xp, windows 2000, vista

...
written by Cy4n1d3Pr0j3kt, May 29, 2007

To my great dislike, many people are still running on Win2K (including the one-third of my school that hasn't gone to Mac) so some consideration should be offered, but also with a good kick in the butt to upgrade. Windows XP is still very widely used, as many people, like myself, are reluctant to move up to the 64-bit Vista, because the many open source programs we download that were built in 2003 or earlier might not work on the new OS. As for Vista, it's new and flashy, maybe some cool new features could be thrown in with it, so why not dabble around with it? It's what we're all gonna be using by about 2010 anyway
Macs are becoming somewhat popular, due to their almost-immunity to viruses (for now), so many people are converting. Research into a Mac version would be nice. Ahh, Linux. I've never used a Linux machine, so I really can't say about these. And as for systems below WinME? Toss 'em. Anyone that can't afford to upgrade probably has no business on the internet anyway. I've seen few computers of this era that can run PJ64 on them, and the only ones that can are super-customized, which costs hundreds. Instead of spending all that money on your ancient machine, UPGRADE!
Still loving the emulator, great, job, keep working on v1.7 (lol, so buggy!~)

...
written by Gamesoul Master, May 30, 2007

To be honest, I don't think support for Win98 is really needed. Anybody using Win98 that could possibly use Project64, should really consider at least upgrading to Win2k, as it is more robust, as well as more compatible with current-day software and hardware.

Of course, based on what I just said, I think that if support for Win2k isn't *too* hard to maintain, it should be kept. It's a good OS, especially for people without the money to buy a new computer and don't want to bog down their current one with WinXP. Certainly, if a computer running WinXP can barely run PJ64, that same computer with Win2k would run it faster. So it's not quite correct to say that anybody trying to reasonably play PJ64 has a fast enough computer to easily run WinXP.

I guess it boils down to this... Get rid of Win98 support and keep Win2k support if it's not too much trouble. If there are users out there trying to play PJ64 on Win98, their computer is either much too crappy to ever run it, or they choose much too old an OS for their computer. Anybody with at least 64 MB of RAM and a 300 MHz CPU should really be using Win2k anyway.

...
written by Eli Gottlieb, June 02, 2007

People have asked why others use "outdated crap" like Windoze 9x and ME.

I'll tell you why I keep ME on my hard drive: it came with my computer and lets me run emulators that don't have a Linux port yet. So please, if you really need to drop 9x/ME support, please just capitulate and add a port over to POSIX, SDL, and OpenGL. That will just about automagically give you ports to Linux and Mac OS X with only minor tweaks between each.

...
written by Jonny Rocks Hard, June 03, 2007

Roberto Vlasman Raif: Google it. Due to legal reasons downloads are not available from this site (nor are links either.) You'll have to do what everyone else has to and google or yahoo or whatever.

To everyone still running 98...

Past versions of P64 are STILL available to download. I doubt this will change in the future. In order to properly build a better product, you have to look to the future. Also, Vista is completely FINE. The only problem I've had with Vista is driver support for a wireless network card that I used on my old computer (which didn't even WORK on that computer either, by the way.) Likewise, I had a bit of initial trouble running it on Vista. However, I am now connected wirelessly to the internet despite the fact that Dynex (I would reccoment NOT buying from this company under any circumstance btw) did not supply Vista drivers for their product. Checked the site and everything. So it's not Vista that was the problem, but Dynex.

Also, quit looking for an excuse to hate on a system. It just came out. Problems will arise. You cannot test an OS when there are millions of different system combinations available. Give them a break.

So, in conclusion...
Drop 9x/ME support. Older versions are available for them, besides, 1.6 is still a fine emulator as it is.
As for Win2k, if you guys can find time for it I'd say go for it, but if it's going to get in the way of progress, than I say drop it. But only if you're going to have to do too much more work to include support for it.
Go for full Vista support. It'd be nice to see people supporting Vista more (then again, I'm still slightly ticked that Dynex didn't have Vista drivers so that could be it) and Vista is nowhere near as bad as people are making it out to be.
Keep XP support too, because it's one of the better operating systems out there, and it should have support. It should be around for a while too, so keeping support for it is crucial as to not alienate those who keep it for gaming.

As for the Linux crowd, nothing is stopping you from partioning the hard drive and installing XP or 2000 and playing there. Sure, it may not be the most convenient, but it's not like you are unable to play. It's clear that the developers want to keep it for Windows, respect the hard work that they've been doing and leave it at that.

...
written by bumbleskull, June 05, 2007

I would like to see this emulator available for linux (and all unix based systems at that) but that most likely won't' occur unless the emulator is open sourced (as pcsx2 recently did).

...
written by Jase, June 06, 2007

if you want my opinion, drop Windows 98/ME support for the next version, but keep the latest version supporting Windows 98 always available for download, also getting Linux and Mac support would be good for the near future. keep up the good work hey. so keep Windows 2000 and XP Support, i'm not sure but does this support Windows 64bit? (XP and Vista wise), might be a good idea also , alright that's my say, laters.

...
written by Jase, June 06, 2007

me again. i was just thinking, maybe you could get this working on the old Windows 3.1/95, maybe even DOS, hehe that would be interesting and maybe just for fun. anyway, laters.

...
written by WHOOP WHOOP, June 07, 2007

Put it on Vista and Xp, others can get screwed because there is plenty of older versions which work perfectly!

...
written by NRG753, June 08, 2007

Yeah, drop support for old OS's, if people really need to run N64 games on them, they'll do fine with older versions of PJ64.

...
written by Cartmage, June 08, 2007

Just thought I might point out that I am using it (PJ64 1.6)on Vista Ultimate x86 and it seems to be working just fine, it seems that it is working for some but not others though. Perhaps I am just lucky?

Specs:
Athlon 64 x2 5200 dual core
Dual ATI x1600 pros in SLI
4096mb RAM
On-Board Realtek AC97 sound

...
written by Volvagia356, June 08, 2007

That's starange, I use Vista Basic and it runs pretty fine with no problems at all. Only a slight slowdown when I use the GUI.

...
written by Chester, June 11, 2007

I have a computer hooked up to my TV specifically for emulation. That machine runs Windows 2000 and probably won't run another operating system for a very long time, so please don't drop 2000! I personally don't care about Windows ME/98 or 95 though.

...
written by Zach, June 12, 2007

Hey, I can't get majoras mask to work right, is there a plugin of configuration I should be using for this game?

...
written by pog, June 13, 2007

vista mac and linux, drop the rest, you should spend your time on developing super sal 64

...
written by M.A. Superior, June 14, 2007

I running windows 98 se(Looking hard for drivers for usb. pc="AMD 750 mhz 256mb ram 30 gig hd 8mb video card") I might burn the emulator to a disk to get it on my machine. I would love to see some mac support(OS X 10.1 and up) I have a Power Mac g4(500 mhz x 2,512mb ram 20 gig hd x 2, 16mb video ram, OS X 10.1.5). I want to upgrade so bad, but lack of money comes into play and prevent me from doing this task.

...
written by Bloby, June 15, 2007

You should do win 2000 too for those of us using really old laptops on the go...

...
written by tc, June 16, 2007

I would make 2000/XP/Vista officially supported, and (if the source code is going to be available) let other people handle any ports they need. I believe that's how SNES9X is.

...
written by Jolliv, June 19, 2007

If PJ64 supports Windows XP, doesn't it automatically support Windows 2000 as well? Either way, I request continued Win2k support... I'd also encourage Linux support.

...
written by Lexluthermiester, June 20, 2007

As I'm still running PJ-64 on a Win-ME machine[for speed reasons], I'd personally like to see support for ME to continue. However I'd be willing to move that machine to Win2k if needed. BTW, for all of you out there who seem to be confused about the issue, unless a software developer writes out a routine that rejects the win2k environment, ANYTHING that runs on WinXP will also run on Win2k. C&C3 is proof of this as a patch to allow it to run Win2k, even though C&C3 was written to reject Win2k. The mod patch changed fewer than 8 lines of code. So if PJ-64 runs on WinXP, it will run on Win2k. Unless they lock out Win2k, which would be more of a headache and I don't see them doing that...

Cheers

...
written by uxe1, June 24, 2007

well i would hope you will still keep it win98 compatible as I am on a Linux system and mt wine tools is only win98 please don't leave me out in the cold!

...
written by L, June 25, 2007

I run Windows 2k pro on 2 machines and 98 se on 2 others, please keep 2k support and 98 would be appreciated. also i havent messed with pj64 on win 95 very much at all.

...
written by rhY, June 26, 2007

For the record, Ubuntu is growing by leaps and bounds. I realize that the code is probably in some proprietary format for some MS compiler, but switching to gcc and having a true cross platform emulator would be much better and garner a lot more attention, and possible developers as well. Personally, I don't plan on supporting Windows any more as a tech support guy for the 75 people in my family that require tech support. Most of them only want mario kart anyway, and that does work in mupen, but I like project 64 better for a number of reasons, and would love to use it without trying to coerce wine into working.

...
written by chris klepy, June 26, 2007

i keeps telling me that direct 3d is not compatible with my card and i nee to get some 3d graphics card what the hell do i do it wont let me play
!!!!!!!

...
written by Setar, June 27, 2007

Drop 9x. 98 is now considered obsolete by Microsoft, and hardly anyone uses it. Old games for me tend to work fine in XP, and for DOS games, there's always DOSBox (freeware DOS emulator).

I hear many good things about 2000 and it's an NT kernel, and apparently it's got lots of the same features as XP. I say keep 2000 as it won't be too hard to keep up. Anyone who has a comp worthy of running this should have 2000 anyway, as said before.

ME is just garbage. From what I heard, it was a crappy attempt to blend the 9x and NT kernel - didn't Microsoft discontinue support for it after only a year because it sucked so bad? Either way, no one uses it unless they're idiots or like experimenting. Drop it.

So yeah. Vista/XP/2000. 9x would be too hard to keep up with and it's obsolete, ME is just crap. 2000 is NT4, XP is what, NT5.1? Same kernel base, so 2000 shouldn't be terribly hard to keep up. I actually think I'd start looking at dropping 2000 support around next OS, depending on how support for 2000 goes. However, MS now considers 9x obsolete, not many companies support it anymore, drivers can't be found, no one uses it. If anyone NEEDS PJ64 for a 98 box, just keep 1.6 up for them - it shouldn't be too hard on them to get 1.6.

...
written by TwistedWhizz, June 28, 2007

Just to back up what rhY says above; Ubuntu is fast becoming the de facto Linux desktop. I know you guys have already said that a port to Linux is unlikely, but I would urge you to reconsider. Linux is really taking hold now: witness Bill Gates efforts to destroy it. More and more are making the move, especially as Vista offers nothing but woe to many people. Dell are now selling Linux PC's, and many hardware manufacturers are including Linux in their plans. I say all this just to illustrate the growing popularity of Linux, and hopefully to urge your thoughts in that direction. Project 64 is an amazing piece of software, and really ought to be available to Linux users. I do still use XP myself, but when it is killed off by Microsoft, that is when my relationship with Microsoft products comes to an end. I am pretty sure I am not alone in this.

...
written by JussiRM, June 28, 2007

Linux version would be cool

...
written by Kahlil, June 29, 2007

I think you should seriously consider releasing Project64 under the GNU General Public License. This is a Free Software license, where "free" refers to freedom, not price. Free software usually doesn't cost money, but it gives the USERS freedom. This includes the freedom to make modified versions that run on old versions of Windows or Mac OS. I recommend the GNU General Public License, which allows you to charge money for beta (or stable) versions, providing you include the source code. For more information on Free (as in "freedom") Software, please visit www.gnu.org

...
written by TwistedWhizz, June 29, 2007

Just to clarify my above post: I do still use XP, but I only really use it for programs like PJ64. I've been a Linux user for a year or two now, and dual-boot with Windows. Just thought I ought to make that point, as it isn't so clear in my above post. It seems to suggest I don't even use Linux! Like many, Ubuntu is my main system.

I think PJ64 going to GNU GPL would be a great idea. Isn't ZSNES already under this license too?

...
written by Peter, June 30, 2007

Ditch Vista and start supporting OS X and Linux! (OS X is in desperate need of an N64 emu)

...
written by RyanGDI, July 01, 2007

PLEASE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT WINDOWS 2000!!! ME AND MANY OF MY FRIENDS USE PJ64 ON WINDOWS 2000 OPERATING SYSTEMS! PLEASE DO NOT DROP WIN 2000 SUPPORT!!!

Thanks!!!

...
written by Alexis, July 01, 2007

I have Project 64 in Windows Vista and the program didn't work, when I open the program, it said " Direct3D failed to initialize your HAL device make sure you have a properly configured 3D graphics card compatible with Direct 3D 6.0" Someone know how to resolve this problem???

...
written by oskar, July 02, 2007

i also have this problem!

i downloaded it , and i have Vista,

when i choose the ROM it loads it to 100 then it says something about direc3d

...
written by rafaelinux, July 02, 2007

I can tell you people that there's tons of people using Win98/ME, so discarding support for these OSes is somehow cruel.. but... since I'm on XP.. do as you like!!! xD

...
written by Antony, July 04, 2007

For everyone who is still trashing/hating/bad mouthing/putting down Windows Vista should get a life!
I have a dual boot Windows XP and Windows Vista home premium computer and although there are a lack of device driver support and software compatibility at the moment Vista can do many amazing things and more to come in the future.

In 1-2 years from now Windows 95/98/ME/2000 will be all outdated just like dinosaurs and nobody will use them so the owners of those operating systems will need to upgrade because only XP/Vista/Vienna will be left.

In the future if you decide to buy a truly powerful vista machine e.g a 2.2 or 2.4Ghz Intel Core2Duo or even a 2.0Ghz Quad Core with 2Ghz ram you will be able to play and burn Blueray discs, play directx 10 games using e.g a Nvidia 8800GTS with 16x Anti-aliasing, capable of high resolution monitors like dual 22 inch LCD HDCP ready with 2048x1536 at 85Hz, play PS2, Xbox and GameCube games without many technical difficulties (providing the emulation software works), be able to watch and record digital satellite t.v. in high definition.

My advice for everyone not using Vista is to wait about 1-2 years and by that time Vista will be much better with more updates, support and stability. Remember this: Windows Vista is still young and new, just wait until it ages and matures.

Summary: Project64 v1.7 doesn't need 95/98/ME support, 2000 can be included until it is either not in use or outdated and most definitely include XP/Vista for both 32 and 64-bit editions. Thats my 2 cents, thanks for reading.

...
written by Derek Mason, July 05, 2007

As long as support for Windows 9x isn't purposely broken I don't see a problem. For example if you guys find that rewriting a certain part of the code boosts performance and compatibility in Windows 2000 and beyond but breaks Windows 9x then let Windows 9x die. As for Windows 2000 it should continue to be supported and as long as XP is it would be really hard to break 2000 support. Remember Windows XP is BASICALLY Windows 2000 with a few newer features slapped on top, albeit better security since Service Pack 2, but XP is still just a fancy Windows 2000.

Windows Vista is something I do not understand why is treated so harshly. I happen to have picked up a copy when it came out in January and yes.. it was horrible with compatibility at the time but ran full blast on an aging system (Pentium 4 2.4ghz HT, 1gb RAM, Geforce 6600. Yes i consider this an aged system. However I am going to college in a few months and purchased a Laptop (AMD Turion 64 x2 1.8ghz TL-56, 2gb RAM, ATI Xpress 1150 graphics) and it came with Windows Vista Premium. It runs like a champ! Fast, Aero is a nice modern look, and compatibility had improved VASTLY since i had last used it. Windows Vista will be the future.. Like some have said it just needs its time to mature. Drivers aren't quite perfect yet and not every single XP program is going to run 100 percent right but I run PJ64 1.6 on it with zero problems and full speed.

Drop Win9x only if you have to... but a note for anyone still using it... Upgrade to a Windows NT based operating system, at least windows 2000. You won't regret it. -If your computer can't handle Windows 2000 then you dont meet the system requirements for PJ64 anyways-

...
written by Derek Mason, July 05, 2007

Alexis

I noticed you said Direct 3D complained about not finding a 3D device. Make sure that you have the latest video drivers for Windows Vista. Its not a PJ64 problem because it runs nicely for me. Its a driver issue.

...
written by Bowserschaos, July 05, 2007

i vote for 2000 and XP but not vista BUT i want project 64 1.7!public!

...
written by l, July 05, 2007

i used 98 with my 6600gt with pj64 good cheesy combination version i used worked fine
lets see some vista ,holey xp sucked

...
written by Derek Mason, July 06, 2007

Not Vista? I have no special bias for Vista but sadly my laptop can't run XP due to the Wireless being so new the company doesn't have a XP driver in any case Vista will be the future... its in that beginning phase where everyone hates it. I remember when everyone disliked XP because it was a resource hog lol.

...
written by August Yifu, July 08, 2007

Hey, if you want to be one of those arrogant developers that forget about perfectly good 98/ME, go ahead. Google and Apple are that way. I don't care either way now 'cause I'm on an XP MCE computer.

While I'm commenting on this site, let me rant about how much I dislike this whole "donate to beta test" scam. If it's a freeware project, why the hell do I have to pay money to use the latest version? Sounds more like shareware to me. And really, who charges money for a program used primarily for piracy? Oh, that's right. Limewire does.

Don't get me wrong, I love Project 64. I got my entire junior high's computer network installed with it and a few choice games long ago. Nobody did anything productive in that library. Ever.

But... nobody should have to *pay* to use an emulator, even if said money goes toward alleged development costs. As I understand it, the average Project 64 user is a preteen. He doesn't have a job, and the only way he can pay for the emulator is to bum money off of his parents. Does the average parent want their hard-earned money to go towards the development of this sort of thing. I mean.. Nintendo asserts that emulators are illegal. *shrug*

...
written by b2609, July 08, 2007

I'd say just support Windows 2000, XP, Vista, and Linux.

...
written by RAT, July 09, 2007

Why don't work in a Linux Version?, Get some look to Nexius or OpenArena, there are games that are running amazing on Linux. I think that emulator should be multi-plataform. Support for 95/98/ME?, for what?, who used them anyway?.
On the other hand, Linux has a great potential. It is necessary to choose by a free alternative. Just think about it!!!

PJ64 Linux Versión!!!

Sorry about my English. It is the language that has imposed, the most not spoken.

...
written by Antony, July 10, 2007

Now that Ive talked about Windows versions, I'll now talk about Linux/Mac.

The Project64 team have already said NO to developing for these operating systems but If someone knows how to use open source code from windows and change it into Mac OS X and/or Linux operating systems then that would be good but to do that would take a lot of work.

Look at Mac OS X for an example, Mupen64 works and so does Sixtyforce but the problems are a) Sixtyforce is Shareware so the save states and full screen is disabled b) the annoying logo cannot be removed c) there is Joystick/Gamepad support but I could not get my Joytech Neo S gamepad to work because the analog sticks wont work in Mac OS X even with Game Companion etc. With Mupen64 a) you don't have save states to use b) there is no joystick/gamepad support at all so on a MacBook you are restricted to using tiny keys which is too difficult.
Someone should definitly make a freeware Nintendo64 emulator which has save states, full joystick/gamepad support as well with different Graphic plugins to use.

I have never used a Linux OS in my life so I can't say much about it.

...
written by Luca, July 11, 2007

i use windows 2000 and debian linux ( on P4 2600 and radeon 9800 )
XP is 2000 with a new GUI.
in win2000 i play without problems:
all Valve games Half Life, Half Life 2 , and all Source Mods Dystophia
all opengl games: quake 1,2,3,4
and UT2004 and mods with full details.
and in conclusion grand prix legends with Logitech full support for G25

WIN2000 is for gaming.
Linux is difficult because driver ati and no support for joystick, G25, and similar device.

...
written by TwistedWhizz, July 11, 2007

Debian is difficult. Linux for the most part offers excellent support for ATI/nVidia drivers, other devices such as joysticks etc. I use Ubuntu 7.04 and have up to date nVidia drivers which affords me 3D gaming and desktop effects, and I use both my dual analogue joypads fine for all types of gaming. So maybe for you Luca I might recommend an upgrade to the latest Ubuntu!

...
written by Steve, July 12, 2007

I would love to see a GNU version, or a Mac version, but the first step is to make Project64 FREE SOFTWARE (a.k.a. "open source"). This gives the users the freedom to modify the code and create other ports, which gives the Pj64 developers the freedom to not have people screaming for Mac and GNU versions. Everybody wins!

...
written by pog, July 13, 2007

PLAYSTATIONPORTABLE VERSION

...
written by stevie l., July 14, 2007

Thank you for giving us the fun to play our Nin64 favorite game on pc !

For Windows, you shouldn't support more than the 2 last OS available (same opinion as Sebastien Bareil, April 17, 2007 said). The Win9x family is obsolete. Even in the WinNT family, NT4.x is also obsolete, Win2000 is not but almost. The bare MINIMUM sould be WinXP SP2.

To run WinXP decently, a typical 4 year old machine can do the job. So, if you have a 4 year old machine or less, you should at least install WinXP.

If these people just don't want to upgrade and stick with obsolete system, it's there decision/problem and not our/yours. Personaly, I don't want a software that have extra programming code and is subject to make my pc crash just to stay 'compatible' for OS that only a few folks used today ! The best example : Windows...

The only reason why people want support for obsolete OS is that they don't want to buy a new system or get a good used one with decent specs. A good machine is very afordable today and anyone can get a more recent machine even if it's not brand new. Except extremely poor people, there is absolutely no reasons to demand support for more than 4 years old hardware. You have to follow technologie. If not, play DOS game !

For example, this is my 3 year pc that run the emulator just fine :

cpu: athlon xp 2200 (not overclocked)
ram: 1 gb ddr 400 (dual channel not overclocked)
hdd: maxtor 120 gb (7200 rmp, 2 mb cache)
os: winxp sp2 pro

...
written by toko, July 14, 2007

please need this pj64 send my mi e-mail is shiko_inuyasha@hotmail.com

...
written by Leave the outdated OS OUT!, July 15, 2007

Serously why. The only reason they run those dinosaurs is

-they are using a family computer (bought back then)
-are too poor (probably have no money) and using a computer not their own. (see first reason)

OMG why even ask people just do it. Seeing as the Project64 team has already asked this question.

...
written by kte, July 15, 2007