🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3urmk3$19k...@line05.socketis.net>,
jco...@socketis.net (Jody Cooper) wrote:

[Compress]
> This is complete and total HOGWASH!  It's nothing but an excuse when in 
> fact that it's fautly programming on IBM's part.  How can you blame id for the 
> "game programming." The game was designed for DOS!  Not Windows, not Win95, 
> not OS/2, but DOS. 

Well, not really. It was designed for the IBM PC using DOS as a loader.
DOS is not able - on it self - to run games like DOOM. If it was, there
would be no problem to run it under OS/2, NT and so on...

Now - if DOOM was supposed to run on DOS, why doesn't it. There
are several PC/DOS configurations out there that will not run DOOM.
ID has acknowledged the problem.

> If you want to blame programming, blame IBM.  OS/2 is supposed to be a "better 
> DOS than DOS."  Don't point fingers at id.  If Doom was specifically written 
> for OS/2, then you can, but you can't.

Well, OS/2 is a better DOS than DOS, it can't COMPLETELY simulate
an 8086 computer though. It does a better job at it than any operating
system out there except DOS.

> If you called id and told that you couldn't get Doom to play the sound under 
> OS/2, they'll probably say "Too bad!"  I don't blame them.

But what if you complain about not being able to run under DOS. It will
in some occations not. ID has acknowledget the problem, and say that
the problem is theirs.


_______________________________________________________________________
Terje Bergesen - Bergesen Data