Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A 64-bit comp

233 (96.3%)

A 32-bit comp

9 (3.7%)

Total Members Voted: 241

[Putnam]

On the one hand, lot of people use 32bit system (not to confuse with 32bit processors), and, I believe all WinXP users are on 32bit. So dropping support for 32bit would definitely affect lot of people. On the other hand, I don't even want to think about amount of work to support both 32/64bit versions in DFHack, so I'd like it to be 64bit-only.

Windows XP has been outdated for 10 years and completely obsolete for two years now. I don't think it's really reasonable to keep it up.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Install a modern operating system, play DF on that until you get a chance to upgrade. Linux is free and fits on a tiny USB stick. You don't even have to get rid of your XP.

More Linux DF users might be good for ironing out some of the issues Linux users on certain disros get too.

[jecowa]

Yeah, I don't think people using computers with 10-year old operating systems should expect to be able to run all the latest software on them. I'm used to the latest versions of programs not always working on ~7-year-old Snow Leopard, such as the latest version Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup and the latest version of Wayward. I just accept it and download an older version.

[Starver]

Spoiler: You do not need to know this detail but... (click to show/hide)

I'm still runnng W2k on a machine (that I do not run DF on, and never have) because of no reasonable upgrade path for its software.  My main XP machine is out of commission right now for hardware reasons, but was very good for DF, but awkward to run Linux on for reasons of parallelism.  My other XP machine is more powerful (and confirmed as 64-bit CPU, too), but that's why it is being used to run something intensive of my own design that won't be finished until nearly Christmas, at this rate and I'm avoiding runnng DF on it for tue duration.   I have an old AMD,  early 64-bit, sitting unused but it needs some attention and its XP would complain about too much hardware change (its dual-booted Linux would not, but I'd also have to hackmy way back into root first, or wipe a lot of stuff).  My other linux server is also not ideally suited to run DF on, unless I retask its other functions onto a replacement... My Android tablets are of course woefully underpowered, even if I would root them and fiddle around a lot. ... etc.

I should get a new computer, but I should have got one when it was Win7, really. By the time I was seriously thinking of off-the-shelf, it was Win 8 as standard, which I did not want, 8.1, which I only marginally more wanted than that, and now 10, which I'm still not very convinced about as a Windows version (as opposed to a Doctor), having used it elsewhere. I do know where to get an OEM Win 7, still, and the associated bits to build my own again around it (then attempting to stave off the 'volountary' upgrade to Ten!), but then I'm also in the perpetual cycle of waiting for better/better-value-just-behind-the-curve hardware to come out on sale, and I'm always a bit hesitant about such purchases, such that my next bespoke machine has been on the cards since before even the Win8 debacle.  (I have simple tastes, so even these days so I don't think I'll need more than SM3 graphics, and all the other minor details and specs associated with hardware, but holding out a little longer to be just behind the next advance is so temptingly practical.)

In short, I'm the master of my own misfortunes if I find myself left behind by not just Microsoft's aggressive business-led support-dropping, and letting the best be the enemy of the good-enough in the matter of a possibly unnecessary upgrade (or retasking of existing hardware), so I don't look for the world to stop advancing or seek sympathy from those more proactive in keeping up with the Joneses. But I'm yet to be convinced that I'm the only one who would be inconvenienced by a compulsary SHL 0x10 operation, and not all would find it so easy to travel with it...

[Putnam]

Oh come on, dropping support after 13 years isn't "aggressive business-lead support-dropping", that's utterly generous.

[Starver]

Ignore that attempt at humour, then. As with my 2k machine, the XP is kept offline and gains new software only through deliberate manual updates and (while I do transfer AV updates onto the latter, as lip-service to the unlikely event that I copy dodgy.exe across as well) I have never missed or suffered from the lack of ongoing support from Redmond, whilst working this way.

(The re-validation of the old AMD box worries me, if I ever unmothball it and find the necessary component changes have sent it over the 'same machine' limit. But I could probably just re-run the original OEM install and repeat this every 30 days when the validation wait-limit expires (if the validation phone-line isn't maintained). Or just keep using the Linux on it, once I've bothered to crack my own /etc/shadow again. I'm not tempted to use a moody Windows, though.)

Which is all off-topic to the main thrust of the thread.

[mifki]

On the one hand, lot of people use 32bit system (not to confuse with 32bit processors), and, I believe all WinXP users are on 32bit. So dropping support for 32bit would definitely affect lot of people. On the other hand, I don't even want to think about amount of work to support both 32/64bit versions in DFHack, so I'd like it to be 64bit-only.

Windows XP has been outdated for 10 years and completely obsolete for two years now. I don't think it's really reasonable to keep it up.

I partly agree (however I'm using XP in a virtual machine to build and test all my plugins because, well, with what I use it for, absolutely no point in wasting memory/disk space for anything newer, especially 64bit).
However, DF is a special game, it doesn't require or use any fancy technologies/system features, and it's just as old as XP. So the question really is whether Toady will be willing to drop support for XP for no reason other than to simplify development, and possibly upset some long-time players. Btw, don't also forget 32bit Linux users.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Dwarf Fortress 43.03 was released a couple of days ago. It's not "As old as Windows XP". That's like saying Windows 10 is 30 years old.

32 bit Linux users are 32 Linux users because they choose to be so for whatever reason. They're not stuck with 32 bit like some Windows XP users (unless they're running very old hardware).

[Starver]

Oh come on, dropping support after 13 years isn't "aggressive business-lead support-dropping", that's utterly generous.

Forgive this additional diversion, but I just saw this news of apparently aggressive upgrading. It explains the several people who I've had to help abort imminent unwanted upgrades (for various reasons, some better than others).

Generous, to a fault...

(Now I'm off to scan the real tech news sites, to get a better and perhaps more accurate picture of the issue.)

[Putnam]

Dwarf Fortress 43.03 was released a couple of days ago. It's not "As old as Windows XP". That's like saying Windows 10 is 30 years old.

It's really more like saying it's 22 years old, since it's built on NT rather than DOS.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Dwarf Fortress 43.03 was released a couple of days ago. It's not "As old as Windows XP". That's like saying Windows 10 is 30 years old.

It's really more like saying it's 22 years old, since it's built on NT rather than DOS.

Sorry, high-speed Googling came up wih Windows 1.0, 1985.

[Putnam]

1.0 was built on DOS. Windows 10 is built on windows NT, which was created in 1993. This is from actual in-depth knowledge instead of high-speed googling, sorry.

Using 1.0 as the base is like using Armok 1 as the base for Dwarf Fortress, in other words.

[Shonai_Dweller]

1.0 was built on DOS. Windows 10 is built on windows NT, which was created in 1993. This is from actual in-depth knowledge instead of high-speed googling, sorry.

Using 1.0 as the base is like using Armok 1 as the base for Dwarf Fortress, in other words.

Yes, I wasn't doubting you. Just explaining how I randomly threw up the number 30 without much thought.

[lethosor]

Dwarf Fortress 43.03 was released a couple of days ago. It's not "As old as Windows XP".

He didn't say it was. DF in general is fairly old, and although the rendering system isn't as old as XP, gameplay is pretty much all that's changed since 2010. Some of the technology it uses is as old as XP.

Also, there are legitimate reasons for using 32-bit Linux, not just among people with 10-year-old hardware - it's not necessarily just voluntary.

[Lightman]

I am interested in what DF players use to play DF, especially for the whole "32/64 bit compatibility" thing. I will make polls here and post the results, then make a new one (maybe).

First poll: 64 bit or 32 bit?

I play via SSH (text) on a 32-bit Linux VM.  The hardware is 64-bit, so I could upgrade the OS when that becomes relevant.