booting from drive c...
but then leaves this error:
CPU error illegal call7
What´s that?
About Windows XP on DOSBox.
About Windows XP on DOSBox.
When I mount the .img of winxp it tell me:
booting from drive c...
but then leaves this error:
CPU error illegal call7
What´s that?
booting from drive c...
but then leaves this error:
CPU error illegal call7
What´s that?
Download DBS.exe (it's included in this ZIP file with a different version of DosBox PSP: http://www.mediafire.com/?opcdnldmdw1), execute it in DosBox and select Windows XP (you still need WXP.img in the same directory).
It's not that bad. I find that Windows 2000, XP and Vista are the only functional Windows OS's. 3.1, 95 and 98 were so broken and shitty that running them on the PSP has dipped below functionality--it's just a waste of memory.Wally4000 wrote:Why on earth would you want to run Windows XP on Dosbox..
Windows XP is bloated with bullshit etc.
This is why I don't post anywhere else..
Lets keep these threads away from here!
Wally
Pfft.You forgot ME..GG-Xtreme wrote:It's not that bad. I find that Windows 2000, XP and Vista are the only functional Windows OS's. 3.1, 95 and 98 were so broken and shitty that running them on the PSP has dipped below functionality--it's just a waste of memory.Wally4000 wrote:Why on earth would you want to run Windows XP on Dosbox..
Windows XP is bloated with bullshit etc.
This is why I don't post anywhere else..
Lets keep these threads away from here!
Wally
Lets forget about Windows completely.. I use a Mac, a lot of others use linux and SOME use XP for development..
You really are wasting your time!
Wally
I love Windows XP. I've never had a single issue with it that wasn't caused by my own stupidity :)
However, I'd never want to emulate any kind of Windows OS on the PSP... they are only suitable for PCs and laptops. DOSBox is for playing DOS games and nothing else - don't waste your time with Windows.
However, I'd never want to emulate any kind of Windows OS on the PSP... they are only suitable for PCs and laptops. DOSBox is for playing DOS games and nothing else - don't waste your time with Windows.
Don't mean to start a flame, but i envy you. If you don't have to work in the real world you can forget about windows and play the nerd/geek "i hate micro$oft and love Open Source" part. I _have_ to use win32 platforms but i love to do so, too. Until i'll continue playing with psp for hobby os will be great, but when you have to deal with market... (well there are huge pieces of cake regarding os, but all in very specific fields, not so common for common mortals). 95 percent of people claiming "os is THE way to produce and distribute software" USE said software without contributing absolutely anything in their entire life. When i'll change house i will take some workers and i'll say "Well, i invented open-source house-building...you will build my house for free, then some day i'll allow to make a tour into it"...that's not meant to work. Creating software is my work, and i would like to continue to be paid to do it. Seeing the whole fact by user side, i like to think that if something doesn't work, then i have rights to obtain support because i paid for it. So please stop bull*#@!*ing about software-anarchy and saying "xyz is the best operating system" like the least football addict.Pfft.You forgot ME..
Lets forget about Windows completely.. I use a Mac, a lot of others use linux and SOME use XP for development..
You really are wasting your time!
Wally
Aaaahhhh.... i feel better. But this does not mean installing XP on a PSP is a good idea (really not...).
Than there's a problem there. You are falling for the stereotype that PC's must be expensive. I can build a PC on newegg.com for less than $400 that is Vista-ready and can max out the latest games like UT3, and...can play CRYSIS...(on High)...J.F. wrote:Uh... Vista can only be considered "functional" if you have a 2.5 GHz Core2Duo or better CPU with 2GB or better RAM and a 9000 series nVidia card.
Personally, I don't call that functional at all.
ME? That awful sin-against-god should never be mentioned. And don't bring up system-wars. I use all 3 of those OS's for different purposes. I am a PC gamer, so naturally, I run Windows XP (if I want to run GOOD games). I run Mac on my PSP simply because of it's speed, functionality and ease of use. I run several CentOS, Gentoo and Fedora Linux boxes serving mostly as servers. However, I do believe that emulating anything besides Mac on the PSP is a waste. Why? The only Windows OS's that can run on the PSP are worthless and a Linux installation with a plain GUI is likely to be too demanding to run smoothly.Wally4000 wrote: Pfft.You forgot ME..
Lets forget about Windows completely.. I use a Mac, a lot of others use linux and SOME use XP for development..
You really are wasting your time!
Wally
I built my last computer from NewEgg for $200. ;)GG-Xtreme wrote:Than there's a problem there. You are falling for the stereotype that PC's must be expensive. I can build a PC on newegg.com for less than $400 that is Vista-ready and can max out the latest games like UT3, and...can play CRYSIS...(on High)...J.F. wrote:Uh... Vista can only be considered "functional" if you have a 2.5 GHz Core2Duo or better CPU with 2GB or better RAM and a 9000 series nVidia card.
Personally, I don't call that functional at all.
It doesn't matter the price - Vista is throwing whatever money you put into the computer right down the toilet. Your $400 Vista vacuum is performing worse than my $200 Ubuntu box. THAT is what I object to more than anything else. The average drop in performance on the same machine simply for using Vista is over 30%. If you're lucky, some apps only slow down 5%. Many drop %100 or more. I can't recall a single article mentioning an app that tests as faster in Vista.
That's a horrible argument. I guess then that Windows 98 is better than XP because 98 apps run faster under it. And then DOS must be the best for running DOS programs. Obviously, a newer OS is going to be more demanding, and that's one of the reasons that they make new hardware. If everyone stuck to XP, there would be no need for Nehalem and DX10 GPU's, because the apps would still be limited to XP, but newer programs and games require newer hardware, so why not newer software as well? And to be honest, I don't own any box capable of Vista (my Pentium 4 machine is just about ready to die), but Ubuntu with any sort of GUI runs slower on my PC than XP does (I've tried), plus like I said, I'm a PC gamer and some of my games aren't supported on Linux and Mac.J.F. wrote:I built my last computer from NewEgg for $200. ;)GG-Xtreme wrote:Than there's a problem there. You are falling for the stereotype that PC's must be expensive. I can build a PC on newegg.com for less than $400 that is Vista-ready and can max out the latest games like UT3, and...can play CRYSIS...(on High)...J.F. wrote:Uh... Vista can only be considered "functional" if you have a 2.5 GHz Core2Duo or better CPU with 2GB or better RAM and a 9000 series nVidia card.
Personally, I don't call that functional at all.
It doesn't matter the price - Vista is throwing whatever money you put into the computer right down the toilet. Your $400 Vista vacuum is performing worse than my $200 Ubuntu box. THAT is what I object to more than anything else. The average drop in performance on the same machine simply for using Vista is over 30%. If you're lucky, some apps only slow down 5%. Many drop %100 or more. I can't recall a single article mentioning an app that tests as faster in Vista.
Now I don't wonder anymore why u complain about Vista ... lemme guess: U installed it and it took ages to boot ... ROFL ... this machine would probably not even work very well with WinXP ... I mean seriously ... what can u expect from a computer for 200 bucks? I mean others than Photoshop incompatibility due to low performance?J.F. wrote:I built my last computer from NewEgg for $200. ;)GG-Xtreme wrote:Than there's a problem there. You are falling for the stereotype that PC's must be expensive. I can build a PC on newegg.com for less than $400 that is Vista-ready and can max out the latest games like UT3, and...can play CRYSIS...(on High)...J.F. wrote:Uh... Vista can only be considered "functional" if you have a 2.5 GHz Core2Duo or better CPU with 2GB or better RAM and a 9000 series nVidia card.
Personally, I don't call that functional at all.
I don't like Vista either! First n foremost cuz it in deed has a worse performance compared to the same system that uses XP ... NOT cuz these apps are coded for XP ... that's a dumb argument, but simply cuz WinVista is not efficiently coded! Obviously, I haven't seen the source LOL but if a system with Vista runs the exactly same game or application or whatever several tens of percent worse than the same system with XP, then the problem is either the OS or the drivers .... and since this has been tested with all kinds of different system combinations, I somehow doubt it's a driver issue.J.F. wrote: It doesn't matter the price - Vista is throwing whatever money you put into the computer right down the toilet. Your $400 Vista vacuum is performing worse than my $200 Ubuntu box. THAT is what I object to more than anything else. The average drop in performance on the same machine simply for using Vista is over 30%. If you're lucky, some apps only slow down 5%. Many drop %100 or more. I can't recall a single article mentioning an app that tests as faster in Vista.
BUT: Vista 64-Bit is an OS that uses maximum bandwidth of ur system and I think therefore it could still beat a 32-Bit XP ... for example if I run several download apps on XP, burn a disc and have a video runnning, my processor hardly gets above 50 % usage ... but still, my system stars to hang ... this was the case with my old computer and it's still the case with my new one! We tested this on a friend's computer with about the same power as mine, BUT with Vista 64-Bit: he didn't have these problems! Only with some more additional apps I suppose, we could have forced the sys to show similar issues. So, if u want to use all features of ur system, like 64-Bit support, u'll have to use Vista ...
And don't tell me there's also a 64-Bit version of Xp ... ever installed it? It's rediculous! Almost as lousy as WinME! U can't even install drivers that are made especially for this OS ... WinXP 64-Bit Edition doesn't accept drivers that are made for WinXP 64-Bit ONLY! I almost shat bricks when I saw the error message: "Wrong OS version!" or sth. like that.
Anyway ... one final question: What des such a thread have to do with PSP development?! Can any1 delete or move it plz? I'd prefer moving, since it amuses me how ppl. like J.F. write about operating systems they do not seem to even have used or tested themselves.
I entirely agree that the minimum requirements Microsoft names are bullshit. But what you certainly do not need to run WinVista PREMIUM with this aero kiddy bullshit is a Core2DUO or a 9000 series gfx card. Hell ... where do u get ur information from? Other kid in school? U even know sth. about gfx cards? I somehow doubt it: All u need for this styling shit of Vista that sucks ur performance is a DX9 gfx board! THAT'S IT! Every goddamn cheap 30 bucks card can do this ... I mean even most of today's Mainboard's onboard gfx can do this ... Friend of mine bought a very cheap MSI board with an NVidia 7 or 8 series chip onboard with shared RAM ... and even w/o a PCI-E gfx card it worked -.-J.F. wrote:Uh... Vista can only be considered "functional" if you have a 2.5 GHz Core2Duo or better CPU with 2GB or better RAM and a 9000 series nVidia card.
Sorry, but WHAT is why ppl. buy Macs?Wally4000 wrote:This is why people buy Macs.
Leopard is 64 bit and works well!
1. In order to find 90 % of their software at home useless since it doesn't run on a Mac?
2. In order to have to get used to another OS environment?
3. In order to pay damn high prices ... let's say it: to buy overpriced hardware, just because it's a Mac? I mean come on! I doubt they produce less units per series and that's the reason why their products are so expensive ... It's like $ony and the others: U pay an extra for the name ...
I guess if I'd make my brain think about it I could get u a list of hundrets of such arguments ...
Anyway ... Such one liners aren't what a discussion is living of ... And urs didn' even make sense ... :) ... I mean of course a Mac has several advantages, but since the world is spinning around "normal" computers that can cope with any OS (no matter whether it's Linux, Win, OS2 or whatever), I don't really see a reason to buy overpriced hardware, just to make myself dependent on another Company that is basically comparable to Microsoft ...