- Joined
- 04 Jan 02
- Moves
- 11961
I know that the Microsoft .NET frameworks are required to run RHP
Live. I went to download it, and it says that it runs on Windows 98,
etc., but does not mention Windows 95 at all. Since this is the OS I
use, can anyone tell me if this will work? It's a HUGE download on my
slow computer, so I don't want to waste time on it if it will all be for
nothing in the end. And I will be REALLY upset if my OS prevents me
from using RHP Live!
I just realized this should be in the RHP Live forum... oh well, any
help I can get here would be greatly appreciated.
Tim
The Dark Squire
Tim,
Wish I could help you. I used to use Windows 3.1 then I got into
Window 95. I wished like hell to go back to 3.1. Window 95 was the
biggest pain. It liked to crash for no reason at all. I have 98 Now and
am happy. I hear some Window NP users are not all that please. OH!
Forgot, You were having the problem. Sorry, I dont know the answer.
John
Little Grasshopper
Each new version of Windows is better than the previous one. And now
Windows XP is, because it draws both the Win98/WinMe home users
and the WinNT/Win2000 business uses together with ONE OS, the de
facto standard Windows OS. I run Windows XP Pro and would NEVER
go back.
BTW, many users had problems crashing in Win95 (and later Win98)
not because of the OS but because back then computers were not
running enough RAM. Remember? Most new machines came with
ONLY 8 megs or RAM!! Now days it is recommended that home users
have a minimum 64 megs in Win95/98/Me machines. WinXP,
because of the size and demands of the OS, should have at least 128
megs. I personally have 768 megs in my computer.
Here is your answer...
Minimum Configuration Requirements:
This section describes the minimum configuration requirements for a
computer where the .NET Framework redistributable package is to be
installed. If the minimum requirements are not met, Dotnetfx.exe
setup will block the installation of the redistributable package.
Specifically, note that you cannot install the .NET Framework
redistributable package on a computer running the Microsoft Windows
95 operating system.
This info is from the .NET Framework Redistributable Package
Technical Reference at Microsoft's .NET site, specifically this web page:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-
us/dnnetdep/html/dotnetfxref.asp
I strongly recommend you upgrade your OS to at least Win98 or
WinME. You might be able to obtain a reasonably priced copy of
Win98 from eBay. Don't think about... just do it!!
- Joined
- 04 Jan 02
- Moves
- 11961
Thanks for the info (same to everyone else that responded)! Sadly,
my computer itself limits my options in terms of upgrading my OS--
I'm fairly sure that a previous owner ran Win98 on it with no troubles,
but it definitely lacks the RAM and the processing power for the newer
OS's and much of the newer software. Looks like a new machine may
be on my wish list now...
Tim
The Dark Squire
Sorry to read that you might need to get a newer computer.
On the up side, you will be far better off in the long run if you can do
it. The computing power in newer computers is considerable and
certainly "opens" up your computing possibilities on all fronts. The
processor will be fast compared to what you have. You will have more
RAM, which helps a great deal with graphic intense web pages, games,
databases (such as a chess database), photos, multi-media files, and
multi-tasking (more than one application open at a time). The CD-
ROM will be much faster and might even be a DVD ROM, CD-R ROM,
or combo DVD/CD-R ROM. The combo will run DVD movies, write CDs
and play CD music and software. The bus speed on the motherboard
will be much faster, further helping the computer operate quickly.
Your hard drive will be anywhere from 10 gigs up, which I'm sure is a
lot more than you have now. The graphics card will also more than
likely be a Geforce card with 32 to 64 megs of its own fast RAM - this
amount of RAM usually eliminates the need to "borrow" general RAM.
A new computer will be a total upgrade for you that will be far better
than what you have now, and will make your computing experience
more enjoyable. Once you get used to the speed of the newer
computers it is hard to work on slower ones unless you are paid to do
so at work (as I am).
The Mac is a great machine that suffers from a very small following. I
started on a Mac in '84 and stayed with it for about 10 years.
I switched to the Windows based PC for the same reason many other
Mac users have - the ability to use specialized software. For me it was
because I wanted to use good bowling software to run leagues and
chess database software, which you could ONLY get for a PC.
It's unfortunate the Mac has suffered as it has, because the Mac is the
better machine in so many ways, but if you were a software developer
writing specialized software, which platform would you want to write
your million lines of code for? The PC or the Mac? The PC has a
consumer base of over 90%. The Mac, I believe is somewhere under
10%. In the late '80s the Mac reached a high of about 14%. Mac
prices have always been higher, but what PC users didn't understand
back in the '80s about that was the Mac came with a monitor and
stereo sound built in - no need for a special sound card. Networking
was also built in. The PC had NO networking and many PC's had no
sound or only mono.
The Mac has been and still is the Cadillac of computers! I know it
doesn't seem fair - we tend to think the best should always win. In
the business world that idea often does not prevail. Most folks cannot
afford the "best", so they look for "more" instead. The PC had low
price and much more software going for it. The average consumer
has consistently gone for "more"! Here is another example: They did
it when they chose the video VHS format (more recording time) over
Sony's BETA (quaility - better) format.