Winfellow on Windows Vista - Page 4

woody.cool · 21 December 2008, 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Okay I'm just curious if someone really uses WinFellow on Vista

I'd be surprissed if anyone does!

Shoonay · 21 December 2008, 19:26

I just did...

... and before you guys are gonna question my sanity, I did it only because you said so, it's nothing I would do for serious

haynor666 · 22 December 2008, 14:05

...and I don't because I don't have Vista yet. But on the other hand I'll probably install this system anyway due to 64bit possibilities (MAME 64bit version etc.). I hope it will be worth.

TCD · 22 December 2008, 14:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by haynor

...and I don't because I don't have Vista yet. But on the other hand I'll probably install this system anyway due to 64bit possibilities (MAME 64bit version etc.). I hope it will be worth.

Even if Shoonay will hate me for that, but there is also XP 64bit

Shoonay · 22 December 2008, 14:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Even if Shoonay will hate me for that, but there is also XP 64bit

No drivers, no updates, no thanks.

haynor666 · 22 December 2008, 14:23

Yes but it's a bit usupported by Microsoft and it's english only or at least polish version doesn't exits.

Well, maybe for MAME it will be enough but I have only one strong PC (second is crap) and I need computer not only for MAME but also for PC games, internet etc.

TCD · 22 December 2008, 14:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5h00n4y

No drivers, no updates, no thanks.

Ah come on, your good old friend BSOD will visit you from time to time and you can have a happy time together

Now I wonder if anyone tried WinFellow with XP 64...

Mequa · 26 September 2010, 16:22

The original 2005 sources for WinFellow are available if you want to build your own version using MS Visual Studio 2008.

I'm not sure if this would be any more stable than the official build on Windows Vista and Windows 7 (which are based on the same kernel) - I managed to build WinFellow unmodified and it seemed to work ok on Windows 7 64-bit - but I've yet to compare thoroughly with the official (2005) builds.
There may also be some simple modifications which can be made to the source which may improve compatibility with Vista/7.

Why run WinFellow on Windows Vista or Windows 7?

Well on 1.6GHz Intel Atom-based netbooks with Windows 7 (32-bit), some Amiga games such as Kid Chaos (which I posted about on the WinUAE board) suffer from performance issues in WinUAE, but run full-speed or faster in WinFellow on the same system. (XP also seems to give slightly better performance than 7 or Vista for WinUAE on such a low-end machine - but 7 is fast becoming standard.)

I have both WinUAE and WinFellow installed on my Windows 7 netbook (although I rarely use WinFellow).

Fellow also has historical interest, as it was UAE's major competitor (and offshoot) back in the day!
You can even run DOSFellow in DOSBox and get good performance on a reasonable PC...

Worfje · 28 October 2010, 20:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by woody.cool

I've tried WinFellow on Vista Ultimate SP1 (32-bit) and had not problems at all running it, as long as I don't tick the 'Interlace Compensation' option, otherwise it crashes WinFellow.

This has been fixed in the new snapshot release of WinFellow (v0.4.4 build 3, which has been released today

). It would also crash when enabling exact vertical pixel doubling.

Worfje · 28 October 2010, 20:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodi

I have tried Winfellow on Windows Vista : Winfellow doesn't work on Vista.
If I put an ADF in Winfellow, i have always the screen of Kickstart 1.3 like I have never put the rom.
The only working roms are the DMS
I think Winfellow needs to be updated

WinFellow has been updated and the above problems have been identified and fixed.

I am sorry that it took almost 3 years to supply an answer & solution.

Mequa · 31 October 2010, 17:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worfje

WinFellow has been updated and the above problems have been identified and fixed.

Better late than never!

I see WinFellow v0.4.4 build 3 is still rockin' with the old Windows 95, but you apparently killed Windows NT 4 support (DirectX 3?). Was that intentional?
(Although sticking 95/98se on a crappy old NT4 workstation would fix that issue. I was pleased to see however that WinFellow alpha v0.4.4 build 2 is still available for those with dinosaur workstations.)
I know NT4 was a terrible OS, but the main advantage WinFellow has over WinUAE is on old hardware.

That is, until pocket-size circa-1GHz x86-compatible devices running Windows XP or a cut-down 7 Basic come into vogue.
Then WinFellow may have a new lease of life

Mequa · 01 November 2010, 22:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worfje

This has been fixed in the new snapshot release of WinFellow (v0.4.4 build 3, which has been released today

). It would also crash when enabling exact vertical pixel doubling.

Exact vertical pixel doubling now runs fine on Windows 7, in both low-res and hi-res modes, however with line mode "stretched" the screen refresh runs much slower on my setup with sound enabled, compared with "exact".

Worfje · 02 November 2010, 09:13

Good to hear that it is running OK on Win7.

In the past, we introduced the 'stretch' option, since it should require less cpu power. It is supposed to be hardware accelerated through DirectX. It looks like this does not apply for your setup.

Anyway, I find stretch to be ugly. So, if exact doubling is faster on your system, you have two good reasons to use it.

Worfje · 02 November 2010, 09:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mequa

you apparently killed Windows NT 4 support (DirectX 3?). Was that intentional?

Yes, we had no possibility to test WinFellow on WinNT. If someone would be willing to test it on WinNT, it would be no problem to add the WinNT download to the website.

Mequa · 01 September 2011, 04:06

Worfje (if you are still here), how difficult would it be to add support for the new AROS-68k ROM to WinFellow? This would require extended Kickstart (and serial) support. This would at least allow WinFellow to work without copyrighted ROMs as a totally free alternative to the UAE family.

WinFellow was a great emulator. The only problem is it never got out of alpha stage.

Worfje · 07 November 2011, 14:34

Hi Mequa,

I tried to run Fellow with the rom found in the file AROS-20111107-amiga-m68k-boot.lha.

The checksum of the rom is OK, the basebank address is valid and Fellow identifies it as a 'post V3.1 kickrom'. So far so good. But after this, the screen remains blank.

Which (emulated) hardware does this rom demand from the emulator?

Mequa · 07 November 2011, 17:39

I know AROS-68k requires extended (1MB) Kickstart ROM support and (according to Toni) serial port emulation. Also at least 3MB+ RAM total (I'd use 2MB Chip and 8MB Fast). It doesn't require AGA, as far as I know. Not sure what else, perhaps Toni could help there.

Glad to see WinFellow isn't dead yet. ;-)

P.S. I was going to ask, how about getting Cloanto to update Amiga Forever to auto-update to the latest WinFellow (alongside WinUAE)?
Since they still advertise on the box that both emulators are included...

Toni Wilen · 07 November 2011, 18:23

Yeah, most common problem is non-emulated serial port interrupts. They are required for serial debug log output. (No interrupts = instant hang when first character is sent)

Worfje · 07 November 2011, 21:04

WinFellow supports the interrupts from the serial port (bit 11 and bit 0 from register INTENA(R).

About the need for extended (1MB) Kickstart ROM support, the rom's I found on the internet both were 512KB. So, why would you need extended (1MB) Kickstart support?

I'll try Fellow with some more chip and/or fast memory.

Mequa · 07 November 2011, 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worfje

About the need for extended (1MB) Kickstart ROM support, the rom's I found on the internet both were 512KB. So, why would you need extended (1MB) Kickstart support?

I'm sure Toni could answer this better... but AROS-68k ROM set is one 512KB ROM + one 512KB extended ROM = 1MB ROM, much like with the CD32 and CDTV ROMs. Only in this case, both ROM files MUST be loaded (unless a cut-down 512KB version is produced one day).

I believe this feature was recently added to Janus-UAE on AROS-x86 (e.g. the Icaros Desktop distro), enabling AROS-68k to be emulated under non-68k AROS (although still inferior to WinUAE) and making Janus-UAE work without copyrighted ROM images. I have no idea how non-trivial it would be to add to WinFellow.

An alternative method of testing AROS-68k is to boot the "bootdisk-amiga-m68k.adf" floppy image (this requires a real Kickstart [3.x?] ROM, which defeats the object of a FreeKick), however this doesn't (as yet) seem to work with WinFellow either...

Keep up the good work! (What next, AROS-68k on MESS?

)

26 September 2010, 16:22	#68
Mequa Registered User Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: UK Posts: 497	The original 2005 sources for WinFellow are available if you want to build your own version using MS Visual Studio 2008. I'm not sure if this would be any more stable than the official build on Windows Vista and Windows 7 (which are based on the same kernel) - I managed to build WinFellow unmodified and it seemed to work ok on Windows 7 64-bit - but I've yet to compare thoroughly with the official (2005) builds. There may also be some simple modifications which can be made to the source which may improve compatibility with Vista/7. Why run WinFellow on Windows Vista or Windows 7? Well on 1.6GHz Intel Atom-based netbooks with Windows 7 (32-bit), some Amiga games such as Kid Chaos (which I posted about on the WinUAE board) suffer from performance issues in WinUAE, but run full-speed or faster in WinFellow on the same system. (XP also seems to give slightly better performance than 7 or Vista for WinUAE on such a low-end machine - but 7 is fast becoming standard.) I have both WinUAE and WinFellow installed on my Windows 7 netbook (although I rarely use WinFellow). Fellow also has historical interest, as it was UAE's major competitor (and offshoot) back in the day! You can even run DOSFellow in DOSBox and get good performance on a reasonable PC... Last edited by Mequa; 26 September 2010 at 17:25.

07 November 2011, 14:34	#76
Worfje Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 125	Hi Mequa, I tried to run Fellow with the rom found in the file AROS-20111107-amiga-m68k-boot.lha. The checksum of the rom is OK, the basebank address is valid and Fellow identifies it as a 'post V3.1 kickrom'. So far so good. But after this, the screen remains blank. Which (emulated) hardware does this rom demand from the emulator? Last edited by Worfje; 07 November 2011 at 15:05.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
deliplayer for windows vista problem?	JohnnyBeGood	support.Apps	38	05 March 2023 19:06
SMBFS And Windows VIsta	@UAE	support.Apps	11	12 April 2011 20:41
Can't get CDTV emulation to work on Windows Vista	Emu500	support.WinUAE	3	03 June 2009 17:15
Winuae and Windows Vista	BigB	support.WinUAE	26	20 December 2008 22:27
Disable Windows shortcuts while running WinUAE on Vista	thomas	request.UAE Wishlist	11	24 July 2008 10:49

21 December 2008, 19:26	#62
Shoonay Global Caturator Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Porando Age: 43 Posts: 6,105	I just did... ... and before you guys are gonna question my sanity, I did it only because you said so, it's nothing I would do for serious

22 December 2008, 14:05	#63
haynor666 retro maniac Join Date: May 2002 Location: Tarnobrzeg/Poland Age: 45 Posts: 1,748	...and I don't because I don't have Vista yet. But on the other hand I'll probably install this system anyway due to 64bit possibilities (MAME 64bit version etc.). I hope it will be worth.

22 December 2008, 14:23	#66
haynor666 retro maniac Join Date: May 2002 Location: Tarnobrzeg/Poland Age: 45 Posts: 1,748	Yes but it's a bit usupported by Microsoft and it's english only or at least polish version doesn't exits. Well, maybe for MAME it will be enough but I have only one strong PC (second is crap) and I need computer not only for MAME but also for PC games, internet etc.

02 November 2010, 09:13	#73
Worfje Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 125	Good to hear that it is running OK on Win7. In the past, we introduced the 'stretch' option, since it should require less cpu power. It is supposed to be hardware accelerated through DirectX. It looks like this does not apply for your setup. Anyway, I find stretch to be ugly. So, if exact doubling is faster on your system, you have two good reasons to use it.

01 September 2011, 04:06	#75
Mequa Registered User Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: UK Posts: 497	Worfje (if you are still here), how difficult would it be to add support for the new AROS-68k ROM to WinFellow? This would require extended Kickstart (and serial) support. This would at least allow WinFellow to work without copyrighted ROMs as a totally free alternative to the UAE family. WinFellow was a great emulator. The only problem is it never got out of alpha stage.

07 November 2011, 17:39	#77
Mequa Registered User Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: UK Posts: 497	I know AROS-68k requires extended (1MB) Kickstart ROM support and (according to Toni) serial port emulation. Also at least 3MB+ RAM total (I'd use 2MB Chip and 8MB Fast). It doesn't require AGA, as far as I know. Not sure what else, perhaps Toni could help there. Glad to see WinFellow isn't dead yet. ;-) P.S. I was going to ask, how about getting Cloanto to update Amiga Forever to auto-update to the latest WinFellow (alongside WinUAE)? Since they still advertise on the box that both emulators are included...

07 November 2011, 18:23	#78
Toni Wilen WinUAE developer Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland Age: 49 Posts: 26,505	Yeah, most common problem is non-emulated serial port interrupts. They are required for serial debug log output. (No interrupts = instant hang when first character is sent)

07 November 2011, 21:04	#79
Worfje Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 125	WinFellow supports the interrupts from the serial port (bit 11 and bit 0 from register INTENA(R). About the need for extended (1MB) Kickstart ROM support, the rom's I found on the internet both were 512KB. So, why would you need extended (1MB) Kickstart support? I'll try Fellow with some more chip and/or fast memory.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)