Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
Christian Groessler <chris@groessler.org> wrote:
> On 3/15/21 10:47 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>> On Lu, 15 mar 21, 20:24:56, Sven Hartge wrote:
>>> (I still vividly remember using memmaker and manual ordering the drivers
>>> in config.sys and autoexec.bat to shave another 2KB from the lower
>>> memory so the IPX driver would fit so Doom would run.)
>> For me it was Warcraft :)
>> And for some game (possibly also Warcraft) I had to pretend having a
>> sound card by listing the driver in config.sys, otherwise it wouldn't
>> even start.
> For me it was "Worms".
> And I was using QEMM and Quarterdeck Manifest to get maximal memory in
> the lower 640k.
Ooooh, look at Mr Fancy here, cheating with 3rd party products to get
ahead :)
I'll throw in the special "maximise XMS memory boot disk" I had for
Comanche because that game just *hated* emm386.exe but without EMM,
stuff like "LOADHIGH" to push drivers into the UMB was not available and
I was too lazy to add another branch to my already convoluted config.sys
boot menu.
S°
--
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
- Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de>
- [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
- Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de>
- Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de>
- Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de>
- Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Joe <joe@jretrading.com>
- Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de>
- Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
- Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
- From: Christian Groessler <chris@groessler.org>