So, a few months ago, I proudly rebuilt a late '90s-era PC with
genuine late '90s-era hardware. It wasn't my dream machine (because
the glorious Gravis Ultrasound Max card wouldn't fit in the case! No,
I won't get over that!) but it was pretty close, and I was pretty
happy with the build. Finally, FINALLY, I could play all those
Win9x-era games that just don't play nice with modern hardware. Oh
fraptuous day! Truly, it was all effort well spent; I knew I'd be
enjoying that PC for years to come.

Oh, maybe just months.

Because, damn it, PCEm has gotten /really/ good.

PCEm is - as the name might imply - a PC Emulator*. It's actually been
around for years (Wikipedia says from 2007) but it's been of mixed
utility for a long time. Sure, you could get Windows95 up and running
on it, and even a lot of games, but compatibility and performance were
all over the place. Windows would sometimes blue-screen randomly, and
some games wouldn't run. Given that stability was already an issue for
Win9x-era PCs, the added uncertainty of running everything under PCEm
just didn't make sense.

But PCEm has really improved since last time I got it. So far its run
pretty much everything I've thrown at it with out problem, and it's
now my go-to emulator for Windows98SE.

Which is absolutely infuriating, because it completely invalidates my
need for that computer I just finished building. Why bother powering
up a second machine across the room (and sitting the less comfy chair)
when I can just spin up an emulator and get the exact same experience
(minus the uncomfortable chair)? Do the developers at PCEm have no
appreciation of the time and effort it took me to collect all the
components for that ancient computer?

Why must PCEm be so good?!?!?

It's not perfect, of course. There's no way to launch directly into an
app, and you can't have separate environments per application, which
are too features I really love in DOSBox. There's a lack of options
when it comes to video hardware, and no snapshot ability. But overall,
it's pretty awesome, to the point I'm actually considering whether or
not to scrap the real PC (I *really* could use the room ;-)

---------------------
* Available here https://www.pcem-emulator.co.uk/

No updates since 12/19/2021 though. :(

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

> So, a few months ago, I proudly rebuilt a late '90s-era PC with
> genuine late '90s-era hardware. It wasn't my dream machine (because
> the glorious Gravis Ultrasound Max card wouldn't fit in the case! No,
> I won't get over that!) but it was pretty close, and I was pretty
> happy with the build. Finally, FINALLY, I could play all those
> Win9x-era games that just don't play nice with modern hardware. Oh
> fraptuous day! Truly, it was all effort well spent; I knew I'd be
> enjoying that PC for years to come.

> Oh, maybe just months.

> Because, damn it, PCEm has gotten /really/ good.

> PCEm is - as the name might imply - a PC Emulator*. It's actually been
> around for years (Wikipedia says from 2007) but it's been of mixed
> utility for a long time. Sure, you could get Windows95 up and running
> on it, and even a lot of games, but compatibility and performance were
> all over the place. Windows would sometimes blue-screen randomly, and
> some games wouldn't run. Given that stability was already an issue for
> Win9x-era PCs, the added uncertainty of running everything under PCEm
> just didn't make sense.

> But PCEm has really improved since last time I got it. So far its run
> pretty much everything I've thrown at it with out problem, and it's
> now my go-to emulator for Windows98SE.

> Which is absolutely infuriating, because it completely invalidates my
> need for that computer I just finished building. Why bother powering
> up a second machine across the room (and sitting the less comfy chair)
> when I can just spin up an emulator and get the exact same experience
> (minus the uncomfortable chair)? Do the developers at PCEm have no
> appreciation of the time and effort it took me to collect all the
> components for that ancient computer?

> Why must PCEm be so good?!?!?

> It's not perfect, of course. There's no way to launch directly into an
> app, and you can't have separate environments per application, which
> are too features I really love in DOSBox. There's a lack of options
> when it comes to video hardware, and no snapshot ability. But overall,
> it's pretty awesome, to the point I'm actually considering whether or
> not to scrap the real PC (I *really* could use the room ;-)

> ---------------------
> * Available here https://www.pcem-emulator.co.uk/
--
"Since the day we heard about you, we have not stopped praying for you and asking God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all spiritual wisdom and understanding." --Colossians 1:9 :) Slammy Th. 2 make this old ant hibernate from >9:33 PM->5:33 AM, with a couple(?) brief wake ups wo getting out of bread, 2 end up with an achy body. TGIF2.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

On Fri, 09 Jun 2023 19:42:35 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:

>No updates since 12/19/2021 though. :(

Yeah, apparently there's been a bit of a snafu with the development
team (I haven't been following the drama). The current version runs
extremely well though, so it's not an issue (constant upgrades aren't
always a necessity or advantage. Too often marketing and not necessity
drives new versions). Still, there's always 86Box, a fork of PCEm if
you need an active project. I actually have used 86Box more than PCEm,
but recently switched back to the original; PCEm just runs better.

If you have the hardware run it au naturel!

I had a machine, probably 15 years ago, I kept for years and as I got better with installing and understanding components that I built it into a crazy great 'gaming' computer- for 1997. Then skids hit and it left the nest.

I've always kicked myself for letting that machine go (Pentium 2 slot1, Stealth S220 GPU, 128 MB RAM, really cool old case)

But I just got an old Dell Windows 98 Latitude cX which is comparable, and fast for a Win 98 SE laptop. I'm not even sure what the CPU is but I'm guessing it's a Pentium 3 with some sort of ATI chip. Typically I'm not one for laptops but this thing has all the good stuff and I'll be installing Red Alert 2, Starcraft, Descent, Myst, and all hell whatever old memories I have in the tote for it (thankfully kept all the software). The sound of those really old hard drives I can sleep to

On Fri, 09 Jun 2023 12:39:51 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>---------------------
>* Available here https://www.pcem-emulator.co.uk/

Talk about burying the lead.

I remember all those years ago when I found that I could dock down a
Pentium machine to a C=64. I just thought it was so funny. All that power
for:

10 PRINT"HELLO WORLD ";
20 GOTO 10
RUN

Emulation is hilarious.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 09:04:20 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Jun 2023 12:39:51 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>>---------------------
>>* Available here https://www.pcem-emulator.co.uk/
>
>Talk about burying the lead.

I always have a problem with embedding URLs in usenet; they're just
too messy for me to have them directly in the text. So instead, I tend
to put them as a link at the bottom of the page. It just /looks/
neater.

It has the dual benefit of getting people to read to the end of my
diatribes. ;-)

>I remember all those years ago when I found that I could dock down a
>Pentium machine to a C=64. I just thought it was so funny. All that power
>for:

>10 PRINT"HELLO WORLD ";
>20 GOTO 10
>RUN

>Emulation is hilarious.

I'm a fan of emulation-within-emulation. I don't go overboard with
it... but it always gives me a chuckle when I do it. Like when I ran a
DOS-based Macintosh-emulator inside DOSBox... and then ran a C-64
emulator inside that.

Because... why not?