v2.6 is better overall, has better file support, but the fact that it runs under Windows is what makes it so great, especially if your computer is fairly new and thus has less than reasonable DOS support.

The best way to keep track of the current map is to have a global string called curr_map or such and set it to the filename of each map that you load (best to have each map's autoexec do it, so you don't forget) that way you'll always have it availible.

-Devon

---

--- Square's making money. We're making art.

because it would suck to design and create a game but people can't play it because they have windows 2000. And it's already 2001, so DOS support is just getting more and more obsolete.

---

...which SUCKS. Windows takes too much control away from the user and puts it in the hands of your computer... with DOS, you control virtually every interrupt (well, not really, but you get the idea), and if something crashes or locks up, chances are (if you're experienced with it, anyway) you'll either know why or be able to figure it out with very little effort. Windows crashes at random, it seems, and often doesn't do exactly what I tell it to. And it's not just because it's a GUI -- look at OS/2 Warp or Linux with X-Windows: they're GUIs as well, but they hardly ever crash (in fact, I have NEVER seen X-Windows crash, and I've only seen OS/2 Warp crash ONCE, and that's only when I ran some Assembler code that... um... didn't do what I intended it to). (:

Basically, any operating system or piece of software released by Microsoft is HIDEOUS, and I try to avoid it whenever possible. I've used virtually all of the better-known Microsoft products, and the ONLY thing they've ever released which has NEVER given me problems is Excel. Access, Word, Win95, Win98, Win2000, Outlook... they've all either crashed or done very random things to my data. And now Microsoft is on the verge of releasing the X-Box... we'll soon be seeing the first video game system in history which occasionally gives us "the blue screen". (:

-Tom

---

Come on now.. Windows doesn't SUCK.. Its a large application with a few bugs in it..

My experience with windows has been relatively good. It crashes sometimes, but it works about 90% of the time. And considering I didn't PAY for it, (comes on the computer free) big deal.

You talk about OS's but really arent looking at the big picture.

OS/2 was a better operating system when Windows was v3.1 but the guys who made OS/2 are *lazy*. Microsoft bust their but to get Windows out so support and money will always go to the company who is ACTIVE in development, not the lazy companies.

Linux doesn't even have a company supporting it so to get Linux apps/drivers you have to write your own. (its getting better, but tell you mom/dad or grandmother to use Linux and write their own driver.)
Everyone is not a programmer. (I am but I still want to work on an OS that is *finished*)

Tom - If you think Microsoft is such a hideous company, why don't you take the time to write a simple Windows OS for Verge. Meaning, write a C++ GUI so the regular Verge users can have Windows, PictureBoxes, Forms, Scrollbars, and all the controls Windows has under DOS? Since you think ALL that work is soo easy and should be taken for granted.

Microsoft has accomplished ALOT, and they have made mistakes along the way. But NOBODY's perfect. So respect the fact that they are doing a good job, *NOT A GREAT JOB*.

If I had to get MS a Grade for their work.. It would be a B++ or maybe an A-. But "hideous" implies that the software crashes 70% of the time. Which is NOT the case.

---

All I'm saying is that other people -- not even people with big budgets! -- have created more stable operating systems. I mean, look at Linux and X-Windows -- they were created by random computer users not affiliated with ANY funded company, and they're virtually as stable as you can get.

So if a bunch of random computer geeks can make a stable OS, *why can't Microsoft*, a company that has one of the richest men in the world as its president?!

If you ask me, IBM is indeed lazy for abandoning OS/2, but Microsoft is just as lazy IMHO for not taking the time to bug-fix their software properly before releasing it. The fact that the OS crashes even 10% of the time is unacceptable -- those are obvious bugs that should've been noticed and fixed before the OS was publically released... or, at the very least, Microsoft should warn people that Windows is "beta software", in that it isn't yet fully tested and bug-fixed.

...and then there's the whole thing about Microsoft intentionally putting errors into Windows 95 and 98 (and probably 2000) in order to sell software upgrades... a crime proven by computer geeks using decompilers, thus making the evidence illegal and preventing Microsoft from being sued.

Weighing all of these factors, I think I can safely say that Microsoft is hideous. (:

-Tom

---

If you think about it, the fact that there is any system requirements for Windows proves that it takes too much control away from the user.

Windows 2000 needs 32MB of ram... for the damn OS itself, when in fact it takes all 32MB of ram AND 96MB of disk space(in VM)... for the OS itself.

Why can't someone make a super compact OS that has none of the BS? Let's see, we need File I/O, Video, Audio, Network, System I/O(Input devices)

Windows gives us all of that, plus a lot of crap that remains resident in memory.

Here's a stupid windows trick:
Install a virus scanner
While windows is booting up(as soon as you get a chance to) load of the status of the virus scanner
and you will see it scanning alphabeticly a whole wack of files in the winnt\system32 directory... Windows is loading junk that you probably are not going ever use into memory. As soon as windows finishes chattering, you'll see that it has stopping scanning files. Bingo.

BTW, for those people who think they got windows for free: You didn't. You paid for it as part of the system package. It costs OEM's 50$ to 300$ to include it with the computer. 50$ for ME or 300$ for 2000. Which is why you don't see too many 2000 OEM compupters. All the cheap computers have ME on them.

---

I've never needed it, but I don't need games, per say. ^_~

Blitting sprites is quite a bit faster when the hardware does it in parallel with the processor. Especially when you consider alpha.

---

'Never confuse a single defeat with a final defeat.' -F. Scott Fitzgerald