Old Regen pages

Sik · Post by **Sik** » Mon May 05, 2008 9:54 pm

Am, OK

F1ReB4LL · Post by **F1ReB4LL** » Mon May 05, 2008 10:18 pm

AamirM wrote:IIRC, Windows changes the refresh rate on changing the resolution, so if it sets the refresh rate that is not a multiple of 50 Hz (for PAL) the syncing will be wrong.

lol, it can't be "not a multiple of 50 Hz", because it's a PAL signal for TV (not PAL60)

Shiru · Post by **Shiru** » Mon May 05, 2008 10:28 pm

It's very likely that it will be not multiple of 50 Hz, because only CRT monitors have 100 or 150 Hz refresh rate. Very likely that Windows sets 75 or 85 Hz which is much more common.

King Of Chaos · Post by **King Of Chaos** » Mon May 05, 2008 11:14 pm

Sik wrote:
King Of Chaos wrote:
tails92 wrote:Yes, it's possible to install Mac OS X on a normal PC, you just have to search for osx86.
But, it's not exactly legal.
I'm not sure of that. I think the main problem is that a Mac and a PC have completely different architechtures, so you need a completely (internally) different version of MacOSX for a PC (different processor if I'm not wrong, dammit ).

Trust me, it is illegal, and against the licensing of OSX. You don't "own" the software, you know.

But it's not like anyone cares. Hell, I even downloaded OSX86, and it works fine.

I wouldn't worry about the legalities, as long as you don't update.

If you really want it to be semi-legal, purchase a copy of OSX and use the key and stuff for the "legit" feel, other than breaking the agreement.

Sik · Post by **Sik** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:17 am

Shiru wrote:It's very likely that it will be not multiple of 50 Hz, because only CRT monitors have 100 or 150 Hz refresh rate. Very likely that Windows sets 75 or 85 Hz which is much more common.

Another reason because I like CRT monitors over LCDs. I know, they're bigger and take up more power, but the former doesn't really annoy me and the latter doesn't make much sense when you aren't on, let's say, a laptop. Also all supported resolutions will always look properly, not stretched. CRT monitors often don't support very high resolutions, but I never go over 1024x768, so...

King Of Chaos wrote:
Sik wrote:
King Of Chaos wrote: But, it's not exactly legal.
I'm not sure of that. I think the main problem is that a Mac and a PC have completely different architechtures, so you need a completely (internally) different version of MacOSX for a PC (different processor if I'm not wrong, dammit ).
Trust me, it is illegal, and against the licensing of OSX. You don't "own" the software, you know. But it's not like anyone cares. Hell, I even downloaded OSX86, and it works fine.

You can purchase it and install it on a normal PC

King Of Chaos wrote:I wouldn't worry about the legalities, as long as you don't update. If you really want it to be semi-legal, purchase a copy of OSX and use the key and stuff for the "legit" feel, other than breaking the agreement.

But in that case you could just use the legit copy directly, right?

EDIT: add a header-safe option. You could do it in a per-game basis using a list. If a game is in the list, Regen should assume the header is OK and do exactly what it says. The main idea would be to make it able to run games with SRAM outside the $200000..$20FFFF area.

tails92 · Post by **tails92** » Tue May 06, 2008 2:03 pm

Apple restricts Mac OS X to make it run only on Apple computers. It isn't supposed to run on any other.
And it's perfectly possible to update hacked versions, but you need to do a bit of "magic" by copying kernel extensions from the previous version and applying some patches.
I've done it from 10.4.10 to 10.4.11, I've not used Leopard at all because the ones I installed it on all had 256mb of ram.
But really, if we want to talk about this, let's do it somewhere else as it could go too off-topic

AamirM · Post by **AamirM** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:21 pm

How much the 'original' OSX costs?

Shiru · Post by **Shiru** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:30 pm

Leopard (10.5) - $130 for Single User licence.

AamirM · Post by **AamirM** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:40 pm

Holy crap!!!

That is way too expensive for me.

F1ReB4LL · Post by **F1ReB4LL** » Tue May 06, 2008 3:56 pm

Shiru wrote:It's very likely that it will be not multiple of 50 Hz, because only CRT monitors have 100 or 150 Hz refresh rate. Very likely that Windows sets 75 or 85 Hz which is much more common.

PAL TVs usually have 50 Hz exactly

I'm talking about PAL TV on TV Out.

AamirM · Post by **AamirM** » Tue May 06, 2008 4:03 pm

Hi,

I am not fimiliar with connecting PC to TV so I may be wrong. But what is the refresh rate that Windows is showing?

stay safe,

AamirM

Shiru · Post by **Shiru** » Tue May 06, 2008 4:16 pm

I'm not sure that VSync will work with TV-out. 800x600 can be displayed through TV out, but it can't be displayed with TV timings directly.

Sik · Post by **Sik** » Tue May 06, 2008 5:26 pm

AamirM wrote:Holy crap!!!

That is way too expensive for me.

Not as expensive as a legal Windows

Shiru wrote:I'm not sure that VSync will work with TV-out. 800x600 can be displayed through TV out, but it can't be displayed with TV timings directly.

The reported refresh rate is halved and VSync works respect to it, right? (exactly the opposite case to interlaced mode in consoles)

AamirM · Post by **AamirM** » Tue May 06, 2008 5:49 pm

Hi,

I didn't had a legal copy of Windows before but I have it now. It was given to me by my University in return for a software I wrote for them.

stay safe,

AamirM

Shiru · Post by **Shiru** » Tue May 06, 2008 6:02 pm

Sik wrote:Not as expensive as a legal Windows

Windows price is about same ($130 for Vista Home Premium SP1, $95 on Amazon for now). And you can get OEM version when buy new computer, it price will be included but much cheaper than retail versions anyway.

Sik wrote:The reported refresh rate is halved and VSync works respect to it, right?

I don't know exactly, but I doubt that it will be 50 Hz.