Good 16bit computer to start out with?

[Hatta]

90% of the time you won't have any problems. 9% of the time you'll have to do a little bit of fiddling. 1% of the time you'll spend a whole evening getting a game to work. In that 1% are some amazing games, e.g. Ultima VII, X-Wing.

[Great Hierophant]

6

It can be tricky. Some games really need a lot of the 640k base memory. The more hardware you have inside you're machine the more difficult it gets. Also a problem with older machine s can be irq conflicts.

This has nothing to do with 486 or pentium, it's just a dos problem.

Inmagine a nice pc using a vga card, a monster 3d, a soundblaster 16 and gravis ultrsound addon, you're cd-rom and mouse drivers. And it can become tricky to get it running. And this is a pc my friend used to have back in the day. I also had a similar setup, only without the gus.

 

 

I have put easy AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS files here that will alleviate most memory issues : http://nerdlypleasures.blogspot.com/2014/01/a-tale-of-two-configs.html

 

You don't need drivers for a VGA card or a Monster 3D in DOS. If you are using an IDE CD-ROM drive, there is a generic driver called VIDE-CDD.SYS that works well and takes up little memory. CTMOUSE.EXE works well for any PS/2 or Serial mouse in DOS and takes up very little memory.

 

The problem of conflicts between I/O address ranges, IRQs and DMAs is a PC issue, not a DOS issue. Specifically it is ISA cards that have the most problems. It is quite possible to have any Sound Blaster be able to coexist with a Gravis Ultrasound in the same system. The Gravis card requires that its DOS driver package be installed. The Sound Blasters' DOS drivers are usually most useful to control its mixer, as games typically came with their own Sound Blaster drivers.

[Seob]

I just wanted to point out to the OP, that it isn't easier to run games on a DOS machine then running games on a Amiga or ST.

[Nebulon]

The budget could be an issue.

 

I'd say go for an Amiga 500 or an Atari STe. You shouldn't have much trouble finding an STe in Canada, since plenty of them were sold there. The STe can plug directly into a TV using an ordinary RF box (or a RCA to COAX adaptor).

 

If you get an Amiga 500, be sure that it has an extra 512K RAM in it (you can tell from the RAM expansion bay under the machine). Game compatibility on the Amiga 600 is not as good.

You'll also want a second diskette drive. You'd need a Commodore A520 adaptor to hook the Amiga up to a TV.

 

The gaming experience on both machines is smooth and less hassle than on a 486.

 

If you choose to go the 486 route, then be prepared to deal with a lot of fiddling with DOS to get things running. I won't go into details here, but -- despite people claiming that it's pretty straight-forward -- it isn't. During the DOS years, I helped thousands of customers configure their PCs and I remember it well. If you enjoy that sort of thing, then go for it.

 

It also depends on what types of games you like. If you're more into point-and-click adventures and pixel-scaling FPS games, then perhaps the 486 is for you.

 

If you're more into games that actually scroll smoothly in 2D (like platformers) then go for the STe or Amiga.

 

All systems have great programming tools -- if you decide to go that route.

 

Here's a page on AmigaDOS basics:

http://www.blitter.com/~nebulous/amiga.html

 

And here's one for PC-DOS:

http://www.blitter.com/~nebulous/msdos.html

[mehguy]

The budget could be an issue.

 

I'd say go for an Amiga 500 or an Atari STe. You shouldn't have much trouble finding an STe in Canada, since plenty of them were sold there. The STe can plug directly into a TV using an ordinary RF box (or a RCA to COAX adaptor).

 

If you get an Amiga 500, be sure that it has an extra 512K RAM in it (you can tell from the RAM expansion bay under the machine). Game compatibility on the Amiga 600 is not as good.

You'll also want a second diskette drive. You'd need a Commodore A520 adaptor to hook the Amiga up to a TV.

 

The gaming experience on both machines is smooth and less hassle than on a 486.

 

If you choose to go the 486 route, then be prepared to deal with a lot of fiddling with DOS to get things running. I won't go into details here, but -- despite people claiming that it's pretty straight-forward -- it isn't. During the DOS years, I helped thousands of customers configure their PCs and I remember it well. If you enjoy that sort of thing, then go for it.

 

It also depends on what types of games you like. If you're more into point-and-click adventures and pixel-scaling FPS games, then perhaps the 486 is for you.

 

If you're more into games that actually scroll smoothly in 2D (like platformers) then go for the STe or Amiga.

 

All systems have great programming tools -- if you decide to go that route.

 

Here's a page on AmigaDOS basics:

http://www.blitter.com/~nebulous/amiga.html

 

And here's one for PC-DOS:

http://www.blitter.com/~nebulous/msdos.html

 

Why do dos machines act like this?

 

Would it makes a difference if i installed win95 onto it and run dos from that?

[Osgeld]

windows 95 is a bit piggy on a 486 unless you have a DX4, but to be honest its a bit piggy on earlier pentiums just as well (my 90mhz pentium did no better at it than my 66mhz DX2, but the DX2 had more ram)

 

Win 9x has a limited version of MS DOS 7, and for the most part did fairly well when you wanted it, though it was a bit annoying to remember to catch the F8 on boot and choose MSDOS, or wait for windows to fully boot just to reboot it in MS DOS mode. The former can be changed so it shows the boot menu on every boot, and if you really need every file from MS DOS they did make a MS DOS 7.1 install CD, its mostly full of unused stuff. The command folder within windows gets you the bare basics.

[Kyle22]

I always set up my Win 9x systems to boot to DOS and give me a C:> prompt. If I needed Windows, I simply typed WIN <enter>

That way, I could run games and other things that didn't like Windows more easily.

 

I forget exactly how to do it now, but I think it may have something to do with BootGUI=0 in a file somewhere...

 

Hope this helps.

[The Usotsuki]

In MSDOS.SYS.

[Hatta]

 

Why do dos machines act like this?

 

Would it makes a difference if i installed win95 onto it and run dos from that?

 

 

Why? Because Microsoft is terrible. And no, running DOS games under 95 is no easier than plain DOS. But you should install 95 anyway, and use the included DOS(with the aforementioned BootGUI=0), since it supports FAT32 and long file names. There's no benefit to using 6.22 over 7.

[Zap!]

 

 

Why? Because Microsoft is terrible. And no, running DOS games under 95 is no easier than plain DOS. But you should install 95 anyway, and use the included DOS(with the aforementioned BootGUI=0), since it supports FAT32 and long file names. There's no benefit to using 6.22 over 7.

 

This is a little off topic but I have a really stupid question. I have a old laptop, a Toshiba Satellite 320CDT. Originally it came with Windows 95 and a tiny 4 gig HD. I got it used dirt cheap to play some old games. Right now it has a much larger HD (I think 80 gig) and Windows 3.1. So what would be best for me to do? Keep 3.1, or install Windows 95, or Windows 98? Would 98 make any old games less playable than 3.1 or 95?

[Hatta]

I like 95 on my MMX. It's snappy, plays more games than 3.1 does, and having DOS7 is a great thing. 98 is likely to be a bit sluggish, especially if you haven't maxed out the RAM.

Edit: You especially want 95 for that big hard drive. FAT32 support is a lot nicerthan juggling partitions.

Edited October 10, 2014 by Hatta

[Osgeld]

Agreed, I use windows 95 on my pentium MMX, 98 is a bit heavier

[Seob]

I have a pentium 233 mmx for my dos/early windows gaming and it is nice and fast.

[+wood_jl]

Lots of responses here.

 

Amiga is a nice machine. Atari ST/STe is,too. But if your budget is $50, go with an emulator. They're free. What do you expect, for $50? NEWSFLASH: Retro-computing isn't necessarily cheap. Emulation is free. I think you should go with emulation. I'd like the world for less than $50, too.

[82-T/A]

This is a tough-one... I honestly can't think of a legitimate 16-bit system that's popular?

 

Most of the popular "systems" were either consoles like the SNES, Genesis, TG16, etc... or... 8-bit computers like the Atari, Commodore, etc.

 

As far as 16-bit... you pretty much have Atari ST and / or Amiga as your only real options... if you actually want software that is...

[82-T/A]

NEWSFLASH: Retro-computing isn't necessarily cheap. Emulation is free. I think you should go with emulation. I'd like the world for less than $50, too.

 

 

Yeah, I'm really surprised too... I'm just randomly looking on eBay for fun... and I can't believe how much 8088s, 286s, and 386s are going for? Even the turd Packard Bell 486s are going for over $100 bucks?! Back in the day, I wouldn't even dare touch one, even if it was to drag it to the curb for bulk pickup!

[Zap!]

Get an X68000, and increase your budget to $500. Seasonal jobs will be hiring teens shortly. I totally apologize if you're older than a teen by the way. I'm just assuming for a couple of reasons, mainly the $50 budget.

[mehguy]

Get an X68000, and increase your budget to $500. Seasonal jobs will be hiring teens shortly. I totally apologize if you're older than a teen by the way. I'm just assuming for a couple of reasons, mainly the $50 budget.

 

Haha lol. i'm quite young actually.

Edited October 13, 2014 by mehguy

[Zap!]

 

Haha lol. i'm quite young actually.

OK cool, now I don't feel bad. Glad to see the younger generation getting into the classics!

[Chilly Willy]

Get an X68000, and increase your budget to $500.

Hahahahahahahahahaha! Oh god! You're killing me!

 

Okay, point me to these $500 X68000s that I might buy five or six of them.

[Zap!]

Hahahahahahahahahaha! Oh god! You're killing me!

 

Okay, point me to these $500 X68000s that I might buy five or six of them.

 

Lol, I think I was off by a lot. Add another $500.

[Chilly Willy]

Lol, I think I was off by a lot. Add another $500.

 

After I posted, I wondered if you meant buy an X68000, and THEN add $500 to your budget for buying games (which all go for $100 to $300 each on ebay). I'd love to have an X68000 - they look super-cool and have great stats for when it was made, but they're just too damn expensive!

[atarian63]

 

The amiga is confusing the hell out of me. will the 1040 and 520 both run the same games?

Yes mostly, a 1040st would be better for the few that need 1mb.

Edited October 16, 2014 by atarian63

[98PaceCar]

 

Lol, I think I was off by a lot. Add another $500.

 

And then another $500 to have a system that's easy to use and even approaching anything near reliable. X68000 is a huge money sink, but once you get over the hump of all the parts you need it's not too terrible. Unless you want original games. That's a whole different ball of wax.

 

But man, it's a blast to play with and has some great arcade ports and exclusives!

Edited October 16, 2014 by 98PaceCar

[Zap!]

 

And then another $500 to have a system that's easy to use and even approaching anything near reliable. X68000 is a huge money sink, but once you get over the hump of all the parts you need it's not too terrible. Unless you want original games. That's a whole different ball of wax.

 

But man, it's a blast to play with and has some great arcade ports and exclusives!

 

Haha, one day. For now though, my most expensive remains an Adventurevision.