 |
|
cal_01
|
|
There's a 2k/XP patch out there for SMAC I think.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
cal_01
|
|
I think there's a certain order that you have to apply the compatibility patch as well...?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
cal_01
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Platypus Rex
from what my grey matters recalls
installed smac
installed xp compatibity
changed to ForceOldVoxelAlgorithm1 |
No SMAC/X patches?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jadenstriker
|
|
I think this issue should get its own sticky.
Sense it does come up every week, or so they say, may as well have some sort of deticated thread stuck at that top saying what to do.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
jadenstriker
|
|
No, I mean it's own independant sticky thread, one that is out in front. An issue as fusturating as this usually needs extra attention and have the help issues in the forgound and far more easily accessable and noticable.
The level at which this issue comes up as a problem exceeds just stashing it in a large FAQ base. It is serious enough to warrent its own independant thread.
The fact that it comes up a lot means that enough people have this problem to have the info more convenatly accessable.
Granted FAQ's are still good idea's and convenant, but issues that are as bad as the 2k/XP compatibility issue that hit top of the list kind of problems often require more accessablility then even a FAQ gives.
Last edited by jadenstriker on 24-07-2005 at 06:16
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jadenstriker
|
|
Sorry Maniac, but your wrong. If you where right, we would have seen another post like this aside from mine. Your coming from a point of view of lazyness. It is not a matter of lazyness, it is a matter of being irritated and wanting a convenant way with a path of little resistance, many of those people, will have already did some searching. Many people will goto the FAQ, but because this issue is wide spread, there are going to be a lot of people addressing it, and the more people having the issue, the more deversity in culter, and the more importaince in faster accessability. There are going to be those who have search more exstisively, have not found the answers they needed, and when they come here, will make a quick glance to see if there is a post out in front, and when they don't see one, they will make a new post.
The people that don't look at the FAQ, that you claim are going to ignore a deticaded post, accully do search the forums a little bit first, and they are seeing this post. In all realility they have done some searching, and have lost pacints with trying to find answers to their question, so they are a bit irritated and impationt.
This Thread, unlike the FAQ, is there at first glance, VERY noticable, and answers there importain question quickly. As a reasult, no other new post have come up asking about this issue. It gets them the answer they need, resolves their irritation from extensive searching, and prevents problems that may or may not have occurred if this posted didn't exist, or the person was once again redirect to another area.
Making a deticated post is a win/win deal. You WILL see much fewer new post, you will defuse that person pre-visiting irritation from the post-extincive searching, and other people who are tired of seeing a new post like this every now and then, WON'T get POed because it happens far less then it has in the past. They won't be answering the same question over and over again, as much as they did in the past, and they wont be redirecting the irritated person again, which elemitants the risk of increasing the persons irritation. You WILL greatly reduce the ammount of new post on this same subject. You may not completely stop them, but you WILL greatly reduce them. Those who are irritated with seeing the subject return, will not become irritated any where near as often, because it won't happen any where near as often.
Not making a deticated post is a Loss/Loss. If the person is one of those who are irritated from exstincive searching, not having the information out in front, or redirecting them to another post when they make a new post, will set a bad impression on them. If they are already irritated, that action would risk inflaming it ferther. Inaddtion to that, refusing to make a deticated post makes it where you will see future new post, and people who are tired of the new post asking the same thing, will get irritated again when another post asking about this hits the boards again.
Last edited by jadenstriker on 25-07-2005 at 00:43
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jadenstriker
|
|
Ah, how nice. My compatibility issue is not 2k/XP, it is CPU not supported... How nice.
I just got my game back, by the way.
So, how do I get around a "not supported" CPU problem.
Intel P4 i850 2.66GHz 400/533 Bus
Is it possible to update the instruction set of a processor? Updating the windows drive for the processor got me no where.
Last edited by jadenstriker on 28-07-2005 at 03:44
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37. Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|