Hi Deadcats,
I completely understand what you're saying and thanks for your support.
And speaking of DOS, DOS was never a "gaming platform" as opposed to Win9x/ME being touted as a "gaming platform" by Microsoft.
However, games were developed under DOS and if a game DIDN'T run under DOS, everyone would be *****ing and complaining like no tomorrow.
Here is the same situation. Win2k is being touted as the "business platform" but there's no reason why it wouldn't run games. Now, I go and complain about a game, which was specifically labelled for Win9x/ME, to the mass of people out there, and I would start getting responses telling me that Win2k/NT is not a "gaming OS" therefore I shouldn't use it for games. That sort of comment is absurd and illogical.
Coming back to the idea of DOS, it wasn't 'MEANT' for gaming but it runs games wonderfully. Why would people give in to Microsoft's absurd allegations that Win9x/ME is "more" suited for games?
People tell me that Win2k doesn't have as wide support of driver development and wide range of software and I somewhat agree because there are *some* programs that conflict in Win2k and drivers aren't as abundant as compared to Win9x. HOWEVER, the reason for the drivers is because Win2k wants good, stable drivers instead of some half-assed drivers written by a room-full of monkeys on typewriters.
I strongly believe that there is NO reason for applications and games to NOT run in Win2k. Heck, it's got the same API and NHL 2001 was MADE using NT workstations!!
Regards,
Kearos.
