Talk:DOSBox/Archive 1

Archive 1

Quick question

Should I mention that DOXBox runs on the Sony Play Station portable console?

Only if you've got a reliable source for it, and if it's an officially supported platform.--Drat (Talk) 05:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Unreal mode

Does this emulator support unreal mode, as stated in that article? --surueña 14:01, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

I believe it does, as one of the many DOS games I play in the BeOS version of DOSBox requires it - just not sure which one now.... --Kiand 14:21, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Stub?

Why is this a stub? Seems comprehensive.

slow program

Many games I played on DOSBox run slow on it compared to the Windows XP virtual DOS mode. Is their any way to tweak the settings to allow programs to run faster? (unsigned comment from anon)

I don't have any experience running it on windows (I use linux), but I believe it's obvious it'll be much slower. DosBOX is an emulator; the code is translated with a jitter or interpreted by an interpreter, not run directly on your CPU; and all hardware (vga card, sound card, etc.) is emulated, not used directly. It makes sense because it works in other arches (like ppc) and will still run even if the hardware dogmas do change, like how future amd64 or intel's 64bit cpus will drop x86 support completelly. On Linux, on slow cpus, what we do is stuff like enabling frameskip and jit as opposed to interpreter.-- Roc Vallès^Talk|Hist - 23:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

It's worth remembering that the DOSBox crew are constantly improving the Dynamic core option both in terms of speed and stability. I've performed a test using the DOS version of Quake to compare how fast will it perform, and found out that in 0.70 it was nearly twice as fast as in 0.65, if the FPS given by the program can be relied upon.--The Fifth Horseman 12:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Bs,it cant emulate a game like daggerfall without massive tweaking and lagging and ridoculus hardware., yet there are emulators who can play ps1 games perfectly which is harder to do , i dont care "its emulating a whole pc" argument, it still sucks at gaming and thats what it's made for == LExi == —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.197.208.168 (talk) 22:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Faster then VMware

Can anyone comment on this quote from the Windows XP Professional x64 Edition page:

Another solution is to use virtualization software like VMware or VirtualPC to run other versions of Windows or MS-DOS, but are considered "hellishly slow" to users compared to the aforementioned DOSBox. DOSBox will also allow 16-bit Windows applications to run by running Windows 3.1 on the emulator

I've always believed and heard that DOSbox is in fact slower then VMware and other virtualisation software. This makes sense because it's an emulator even if it does do dynamic translation. As such, this comment sounds incorrect to me. But I don't have enough experience to say for sure. If you're reasonably sure that this claim is incorrect, please go ahead and edit the Windows XP Professional x64 Edition page. Nil Einne 19:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I removed the offending text but those 2 paragraphs are worded extremly poorly. I'll fix that up if I get time.

To answer your question. Virtual PC and Vmware are MUCH faster than DosBox due to the fact that they are virtualization products. They mostly (I say mostly because some instructions are still emulated) use the host processor for processing instructions whereas DosBox emulates a processor. Ronald Phillips

Non-x86?

which may not run properly on newer PCs and may not run at all on non-IBM PC compatibles (e.g. PowerPC Macintosh).

If DOSBox has been ported to GP2X, doesn't that make this statement untrue? Or does the GP2X have something similar to an x86? —TheMuuj ^Talk 18:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I read that statement out of context. I retract my question. —TheMuuj ^Talk 05:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Full screen

Every time I try to play a game in full screen, it won't let me because of the frequency range of my monitor.--67.10.200.101 21:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

DRM?

Does DOSBox have any form of DRM? Devil Master 09:09, 15 December 2006 (MET)

None that I know of. Why would it? It's just an emulator.--Drat (Talk) 08:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Lexi

Like all open source programs its crap . this useless emulator cannot run dukenukem 3d on a 3200 64bit amd—Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.149.107.137 (talk • contribs)

Have you read the issues section? Game console emulators have slightly similar problems. It's also pretty silly to dismiss all open source software because of one program.--Drat (Talk) 22:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it can run Duke 3D pretty well, if you configure it correctly. I've been able to do that with a 640x480 ingame resolution with no major speed problems on a Sempron 2500+.
Have to say, though, that this is primarily thanks to the Dynamic Core option, which has apparently received a lot of fixes for optimization and stability in the most recent version.
I ran a bunch of tests, and it seems to be about 150-200% faster in v0.70 than in the prior v0.65. --The Fifth Horseman 15:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

((Lexi)) Look at mame that is a fast emulator, gens is a fast emulator, fusion is a fast emulator, dosbox is horrendously slow —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.149.107.137 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 20 May 2007.

And you still don't get the point.
MAME? Depends on what game you're trying to run. Most arcade machines were happy with 286 and 386 CPU's, so they naturally emulate nicely. But try running something more modern that uses complex architecture and your complaint will apply to MAME as well.
GENS? Fusion? Sure. Any modern computer can emulate a 7.6 mHz 16-bit CPU. Heck, a decent 100 mHz 486 should be able to.

DOSBox emulates an entire 32-bit computer, so it should be pretty obvious it won't run as fast as MAME, GENS or Fusion except when you're running some really old games. And by old I mean 15+ years old ones.

Furthermore, DosBox is far more complex to use than any of the emulators you mentioned. You can fire up - say - ZSNES, and all you'll have to worry about is running the ROM file and setting a nice graphics scaler.
In contrast, when one wants to run resource-demanding games in DosBox, there is a number of things that should be taken care of - Core, Cycles, Frameskip, Scaler and Output just to start with, and of course resolution the game itself runs at. Just as I said before, Duke 3D can be ran quite smoothly even on a Sempron 2500+, if you are willing to accept a 640x480 resolution. An Athlon 3200 should be able to run it in 800x600 with no problem.
If you need help in configuring DosBox, just leave me a message on my talk page.--The Fifth Horseman 13:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

If Ps1 can be emulated, there is no excuse for dosbox not being Available to emulate old games like daggerfall, why do people want a dos emulator? To play old games, not to have a realistic dos experience at the cost of exeuly emulating games (damn linux zealots), and the cgi in dosbox is worse then your average windows 95 program. Dosbox is just another open source failure —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.197.208.168 (talk) 22:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

---

I have an old old DOS game called "Grime" which I would like to play again (green ASCII graphics / kill the weird growing mould-thing before it consumes the playing area.) It stores highscores on a floppy disk, which causes freeze-ups in DOSBox. Does anyone know how to get around this? Bastie 03:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Another question: is it possible to run Tandy games using DOSBox? Bastie 04:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

In answer to my own questions: (1) I found a way to disable disc access for this game (simply overwrite all INT 13 commands with NOP), so it now runs - albeit without saved highscores. (2) In dosbox.conf set machine=tandy to enable emulation. Bastie 08:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

This isn't a forum for discussing the topic. There is an official DOSBox forum for such things.--Drat (Talk) 05:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Growing controversy over Steam?

It looks like there is some "steam" coming out with regards to Valve packaging a bunch of iD games with a modified version of Dosbox without the license nor source. Does someone want to cover this? There is some analysis over by the way of [[1]] and there are more official news websites reporting on it. But Slashdot appears to have some technical analysis going on. There is also info here on the dosbox forums - [[2]] --EvilMonkeySlayer 11:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It is my understanding that the issues have be resolved. I have been thinking of adding a small section to the DOSBox page about commercial use of DOSBox (2K Games, Vivendi, and Steam) and how the companies failed/succeeded in doing "the right thing".

-- MiniMax.DK 20:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

You'll need more reliable sources than forums and slashdot.--Drat (Talk) 20:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I have - the developers with commit-rights to the DOSBox source repository

-- MiniMax.DK 20:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Slowness

This isn't a forum. Take your grievances to the DOSBox forums. I doubt they've even really read this page.--Drat (Talk) 02:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Those complaints are nearly always the result of users' own ignorance and inability to use the emulator properly.

If I can get DOSBox to run Duke Nukem 3D or Quake smoothly on a 1,75 gHz CPU with 1 GB RAM and Windows XP operating system then anyone can achieve the same - especially with a better CPU - if only they just put a little effort into it.

But then, there are always some people who thing they're too 1337 to do such mundane things as reading the documentation or thinking for themselves. --The Fifth Horseman (talk) 11:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)