Windows98 & FFXI Problem

Networking Code != TCP/IP. TCP/IP is a transport mechanism, not an API. What has changed is the API used internally within windows.

To access network connectivity for both Windows 9x and NT, you have to write 2 separate pieces of code using 2 different libraries.

SE stopped supporting 9x in 2005. Why would they continue to write code using the Windows 9x API after that date, doubling the amount of work needed?

It can be fun to mess with old computers, if only as a way to learn how they work (without messing your newer PC), but if they're only strong enough to support Linux or a DOS based version of Windows, I strongly suggest you don't rely on them for anything other than file managing, web browsing, etc.

Considering the fact that a PC like that costs about 20-30$ nowadays, you probably care a lot about the environment. Perhaps you feel like it should be used as a server or something not too demanding for the CPU (like old DOS based games that don't run well under Windows XP). But again, there are probably places in your municipality where you can disposed of it safely, if it's the guilt of polluting that motivates you.

If you can use your imagination, there are exceptions. In this particular case, you want to install a 7 year old PC game on a 7 year old PC? Fine. I still use a P3 500Mhz for Skype (cordless USB phone with it's own internal sound card) and to access all my MP3s through wi-fi from a shared drive. In fact, because it's so old and noisy (I'm not spending 50$ for a quieter power supply), my girlfriend complains about it. Whenever she tries to sleep, or when we're watching a movie, I shut it down and it ends up being off most of the time because I don't want to hear complaints about it.

So I believe I know how you feel, trying to put an old PC to good use and people just tell you to give up because they think it's a waste of time / too noisy / HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE, etc. However, even if they're somewhat wrong and biased, don't expect too much from an old OS that hasn't been updated in years. Try to find Win9X drivers for a specific 56K Motorola modem, just for fun. Or try to install an old TWAIN scanner before USB became the norm. Good luck finding the files.

This old PC you'll be running is not meant to be reliable, and even if it is, in a couple years it'll just get worse. Old hard drives (10 years or older) tend to develop bad sectors which can really screw you up especially if your using a prehistoric OS like Windows 98. Old optical drives tend to make reading mistakes (not fun when installing Windows from a CD and it jams after 40 mins of installing and then you have to turn the PC off to change the CD drive, if you have any spares that is). All these examples, just to say: Don't RELY on it for anything important, because it will eventually stop working.

The first response to your problem was intended solely on helping you resolve your problem and provided solid reasons why you were having it. That assessment is exceptionally uncalled for.



Well, Windows 98 does not have the automatic networking capabilities that XP has to run Final Fantasy XI without a problem; the problem being that you need to specifically configure the ports so it works with Windows 98. I said this, here's a quote:



Twice, actually:



Since you quoted my post specifically before that rant, it's implying you're directing it towards me. I would really hope not, simply for the fact that I gave you the help you asked for without smart arsed remarks or attitude.

You asked what you could do to fix the problem, I pointed out why you have the problem and what you should do about it. I quite clearly understand your problem and I'm clearly not giving you a "cop out for not really understanding the problem".

Congratulations on getting it working; note that nowhere did I say you couldn't get Final Fantasy XI working on Windows 98. I know you can; all I said was it would be difficult to do so and that you'd need the specific configurations enabled on your router to do so. I then gave you advice on how to make things easier for you, simply by skipping this problem and upgrading to Windows XP. It would be time consuming to fiddle with the specific ports on your router to get a constant Final Fantasy XI connection. I believe I said that:



The answer you were given was helpful and constructive. What more were you expecting from us? It's exceptionally rude of you to turn your nose up at people giving you solid advice because you didn't get the answer you wanted to hear.

Gotta remember how back in the days, to actually connect to the internet on a Windows 3.1 PC, you needed to enter a bunch of IP settings (even in the browser!!!) , and if you made a slight mistake, it didn't work and it didn't tell you why. Now, you right click the network connection and you click "repair".

It's nice that computers are getting more user-friendly but many people think it was always like that. Even Windows 98 was a nightmare and I don't see how anyone would want to go back, unless it's for educational purposes. -_- Plus some people have the guts to say you're "not helping" when they're told that they'll have to learn how to deal with the settings themselves, because you just can't guess it for them telepathically (besides not being paid).

A bit unrelated, but it reminds me of that time when I spent 20 mins telling a new player some neat tricks to make some gil BY HIMSELF, and he just doesn't listen, keep asking for me to give him some of mine. Well if he thought farming for other people is normal, I sure wish he spent a lot of time doing it for the whole server. Funny >.>

Actually TCP is the transport mechanism here, not IP. IP is an addressing scheme.

The "networking code" within windows is actually two parts: 1- the actual network code that manages the device and traffic written to a specification (like TCP/IP) 2- the shell APIs with any auto-configuration features that app developers use to access the lower level functionality in "1". This is not unusual the OSI model, likes this kind of layering. The comments in this thread are clearly addressing the configuration that an app (i.e. FFXI) would be using but no one was making precise distinctions.

As for the question about writing code to support 9x and NT, the simple answer is that they don't need to write 2 different codebases. Although Microsoft is heavy handed in other ways, they've been pretty good at supporting legacy applications in Windows. As an example they only dropped DOS support in Vista. XP still had full blown legacy support for DOS. Laplink using the old proprietary parallel port cable will still work in XP!

With that said the Win32 API is VERY good at supporting legacy apps as well. Many apps written for W95, if not the majority, still run in XP and Vista. Granted this doesn't include all apps (like FFXI) and ppl get bent out of shape when they don't run but the overall picture is still of pretty good backwards compatibility.

Networking apps are a bit more finicky but in general the shell APIs that support networking in XP or even Vista still can be used by Win95 apps. The APIs might have expanded but very very few of the API features are ever retired.

Now that Vista is continuing the reliance on the .NET CLR that was started in XP things are changing but the common Win32 API (and Win64) still underlies Windows.

With that said the ultimate solution for FFXI in W98 wasn't in the "networking code" at all. The 3100 error code seems to be some kind of catch all for things the app doesn't know how to handle...

WARNING: Wall of Text ahead!



The advice you gave was not helpful or constructive in any way and it turns out it wasn't even close to addressing the problem. The problem wasn't in the "network code." As I pointed out before, a PC running FFXI does very little about "routing" FFXI servers to it. Your advice on how Windows98 networking operates in your previous post are so technically incorrect it would take the combined resource kits from Win95, Win98, XP & Vista, an MCSE certification and a battery of IT consultants to educate you.

Your suggestion was an unrealistic solution for a great many people. I don't have the option to buy a new computer at the drop of a hat or buy a new copy of Windows for $100+ dollars and then invest a day or two installing the thing. If you find yourself in a different position then congratulations. That's turning your nose up if I've ever seen it.

Your attitude was to give-up and then rather defensively support this position with pretty vague follow-ups and you've painted yourself in a corner by it. Several quotes from you are below:

"It doesn't have networking support that higher operating systems do; operating systems that simply automatically detect the correct configurations needed to route Final Fantasy XI's servers to your computer. Windows 98 does not do this, nor will it ever no matter what tweaking you do. "

"Congratulations on getting it working; note that nowhere did I say you couldn't get Final Fantasy XI working on Windows 98. I know you can; all I said was it would be difficult to do so and that you'd need the specific configurations enabled on your router to do so."

Note the contradictory passages in bold .

Also:

"to the extent where Windows 98 struggles to maintain even a constant internet connection" -- What? TCP/IP over ethernet is a connectionless (i.e. packet-based) networking scheme. There's no "constant" connection. Also after having used Windows98 for a little bit I've never had a problem maintaining "connection" to the Internet. As a matter of fact it's quite a bit faster and doesn't fail on HTTP requests nearly as often as my Vista laptop which is more than decade newer.

In addition:

"This alone confirms that it's your computer causing the problem and not something Square Enix's end." -- Again this response is severely limited in it's perspective. One issue in solving this was an ISP problem. It's a known issue to Comcast to the point where they had implemented a fix (but it seems to go down after every network outage) . So one problem was not on my PC and not on SE's end but in the middle. So this fact "alone" lead you down the absolutely wrong path again.

Clearly I am coming to this forum for sincere help outside of the conventional means, which several people provided. Not to be given a-stuck-in-the-box answer of "yea, it's not supported". No kidding, I know it's not supported and of course it's something I don't want to hear. Again that's why I resorted to the forums as opposed to banging my head on the phone with SE again.

So to sum up you 1) provided absolutely no help 2) made stupendously pedantic observations and on top of it all 3) were just plain wrong in your "technical" advice.

I totally understand the urge to sit back and make snarky, facile & incorrect comments on a forum. You should keep doing it. But I think THAT'S exceptionally rude.

Oh dear... I don't know where to start, so I'll just point out the most glaring errors.

1) No one uses the OSI model. The internet uses, shockingly, the internet model.

2) You obviously have never even looked at, let alone written anything for, the Win32 API.

3) If you're going to nit pick, nit pick properly. *IP* is the *transport* protocol, *TCP* is the *transmission* protocol. Protip: just because it's called the transport layer, doesn't mean transport occurs in it. Did I mention no one uses the OSI model by the way?

4) Laplink parallel port cables aren't proprietary, they're parallel null modem cables.

5) "Now that Vista is continuing the reliance on the .NET CLR that was started in XP things are changing but the common Win32 API (and Win64) still underlies Windows."

How do I shot grammar? I have no idea what this line means, or what a programming framework has to do with anything in this thread.

6) "the Win32 API is VERY good at supporting legacy apps"

Yes it is... but that isn't what you are trying to do.
Backwards compatibility is running old programs on new systems. Not new programs on old systems.
MS have recently hired Dr Who as a consultant on forward compatibility, but its still in the prototype phase.

7) DOS support has not been dropped in Vista. Support for executing 16 bit binaries and the Win16 API has. Big difference.

8) "The 3100 error code seems to be some kind of catch all for things the app doesn't know how to handle..."

... such as Windows NT API calls.

So, not providing you help is rude? As far as I know, when you ask a question, you shouldn't expect all answers to be 100% accurate, and should be grateful for any attempt at answering it. Who are you to judge an answer when you claimed ignorance in the first place? Just for saying something like that, I'll never try to help you again. Sorry man but that's just a big turnoff.

- Excuse me sir, where is X ?
- Hmm... Let me think. I believe it's this way.
- No sir, it's actually that way. You shouldn't have tried to answer if you didn't know, you know?
- ... Why did you ask then?
- Oh come on, you're so rude.

/clap

1) OSI model is still around. You refer to TCP as transport which is OSI terminology.

2) You're right, you're the only one.

3) So to nitpick even more, if you look back at my initial statement it says that "TCP/IP is a standard..." and then you rat-holed us down the API route.

4) Laplink cables are not to some generic standard as you are suggesting. Client connection apps need to understand which pinout they're using. (And there is more than one)

5) That most windows apps (whenever they were written) will work on most flavors of windows.

6) I'm not trying to run a new program on an old system. I'm trying to run an old program on an old system. FFXI was written for Windows98, it was one of the dominant OSes at the time of game release.

7) In the US "DOS" is most commonly in reference to 16 bit apps, not command-line 32 bit apps. Also Vista doesn't support all video modes in DOS whether 16 or 32 bit apps.

8) Again, the FFXI app is not strictly a WinNT app. FFXI was launched to a very large W98 installed base. SE itself told me that W98 "should" work since it was one of the OSes it was targeted for. NT4 btw was a horrible experience, even worse than W98. It wasn't until Win2000 that games could be run without a good deal of trouble and even then...

Not sure why you're getting in a twist.

I actually didn't mean to offend you. The advice you offered was sincere, helpful and I appreciated it a lot :)

The thing I'm objecting to is the name calling and the edicts that commonly passes for advice on these forums.

Look back and you'll see what I'm talking about. The subject in question was merely the first and most persistent.

Kewl?

I'm glad you resolved your issue and got your game working. Please don't be so quick to condemn those who tried to help you next time, even if you don't agree with their advice =\

mmm bacon, good morning Japan