View Full Version : Windows 3.11 and XP - Do they like each other??

30-03-2004, 02:47 PM
is it possible to network a windows 3.11 computer and two XP computers so that they all share printers? or are the two OS's too different?

Graham L
30-03-2004, 02:57 PM
If you get the TCP/IP addon for 311, it will happily access files and printers on any TCP/IP network. It would share its printers and files, too.

NETBEUI might work too ...

30-03-2004, 03:55 PM
thanks, i will try that.

30-03-2004, 03:58 PM
hold on, what exactly IS the TCP/IP addon for 3.11, and where do i get it?

30-03-2004, 04:30 PM
Dont worry, i seem to have found it.

30-03-2004, 04:53 PM
Isnt it illegal to still be running 3.11? It should be if it isn't ;-)

30-03-2004, 05:02 PM
eh?? why would it be illegal... to use something you paid for??

30-03-2004, 05:15 PM
why would it be illegal to use a version of windows that actually works??

30-03-2004, 05:57 PM
Well it would be better to say it works some of the time due to some fairly antequated design features!
1. It just sits on top of DOS (and DOS is oooold!)
2. It suffers from cooperative multi-tasking (instead of the more modern preemptive multi-tasking).
3. It does not use protected memory space for applications.

All this makes 3.11 not much use except for old PCs that are not capable of running a more up to date OS.

Graham L
30-03-2004, 06:05 PM
Nothing wrong with old. I'm old. So there.

MSDOS is the only good software MS ever wrote. That's because they didn't write it. :D

It's naturally more reliable than the modern "stuff" because the kernel is only a few tens of kilobytes, not many megabytes.

Terry Porritt
30-03-2004, 10:03 PM
Not only what Graham said but also if the truth were known WFWG 3.11 and DOS will still do what an enormous number of people use computers for, send/receive email, type a letter/report in a text editor or Word, keep their accounts, simple spread sheets, Excel etc.

Also to boot it runs so much faster on an up to date machine.

30-03-2004, 10:15 PM
I have it on a 33mhz and it still loads in a few seconds.

30-03-2004, 10:19 PM
I agree, which brings me to this offtopic point:

How does Microsoft figure that Windows XP "Loads faster than any previous version of Windows", like it says in the loading screen? I have Windows 95 on 5 machines, and they whipped XP ***....

30-03-2004, 11:11 PM
I hear what you are saying - but having taught in computer labs with WFWG, Win95, 98, 2k and now XP there is a definite improvement in stability. My personal choice though is Linux!

31-03-2004, 12:57 AM
I used to pull my hair out with Windows 311.
Problems with setting up sound etc and terrible memory management.
My answer for old Computers is NT4, SP6a.
It is compact, fast loading, very stable and supports long file names.
It is true 23bit and multitasking.
Like XP it has a very good Dos emulator.
NT4 now supports USB (there is a problem with software) and Fat32 file system.
NT4 is what Windows 2000 & XP are based on.

Terry Porritt
31-03-2004, 08:36 AM
For what many, many people want to do, Windows isnt even needed. Dos is more than adequate :)
There are many word processors from Wordstar to Semware to Wordperfect, many for free, Arachne for web browsing and email, numerous dos spread sheets, and a huge archive of legacy dos programs for free at Simtel.

I have dos graphics programs, can play mpegs, view/manipulate/convert images, play music, etc etc.

Maybe lets get back to basics :D

31-03-2004, 12:53 PM
Or, Alternatively - Get a Mac