PDA

View Full Version : Windows, the way it used to be!!!



Terry Porritt
12-10-2004, 05:30 PM
I suppose "whtafo" would call this "floating my boat" :)

Windows 1 was mentioned in Valeries posting about Windows/MSDOS, so for a bit of fun, as most PressF1'ers will never have seen Windows 1, I've taken a few screen shots with an el cheapo web cam.

This one is the opening screen (http://sal.neoburn.net/imagef1/files/windows1.jpg) when you type win from the C:\Windows prompt.

The next one is the Paint (http://sal.neoburn.net/imagef1/files/Paint.jpg) program.

And just one more, the the clock (http://sal.neoburn.net/imagef1/files/clock.jpg), there was no system tray in Windows one, so the clock was full screen :D

Pity the quality isn't better, but I dont have a DOS graphics screen dump to hand.

Terry Porritt
12-10-2004, 05:40 PM
Maybe just to prove this really is Windows here is the shutdown screen (http://sal.neoburn.net/imagef1/files/EndWindows.jpg)

Murray P
12-10-2004, 07:45 PM
Does it blue screen Terry or does it go to the dreaded flashing prompt on a black screen?

Cheers Murray P

Terry Porritt
12-10-2004, 08:20 PM
Well, Murray, I have to admit I dont use Win 1.01, Ive tried to get it to crash but haven't succeeded yet. Maybe it just locks up like dos can, and then maybe CTRL-C or CRTL-Break can be used to free it up.

I can't remember Windows For Workgroups crashing very much at all either, I think just occasionally it used to give a blue screen.

Jacob4165
12-10-2004, 08:49 PM
> I can't remember Windows For Workgroups crashing very
> much at all either, I think just occasionally it used
> to give a blue screen.

The only times I managed to make 3.11 crash was when I played around with the 32 bit disk access/file settings

-Jacob

b1naryb0y
12-10-2004, 08:58 PM
Ah yes, Windows 3.11

<50Mb footprint, 10 second bootups, fast and stable. How things have changed!

drb1
12-10-2004, 09:34 PM
> Ah yes, Windows 3.11
>
> <50Mb footprint, 10 second bootups, fast and stable.
> How things have changed!


Want a copy?

D.

Jacob4165
12-10-2004, 10:42 PM
>Want a copy?

Hmm that... would be interesting, considering that the only "working" computer I have at home is an 'AMD XP (1.5ghz) 1800'.
It would take about half a second to load from the boot screen, that is if 256mb of ram doesn't cause the OS to crash. It would kind of be like using a super computer just to play solitaire

-Jacob

drb1
12-10-2004, 11:48 PM
It would kind of be like using a
> super computer just to play solitaire
>
> -Jacob

Depends what app you put in with it.

Little O/S woul be happy with that small ammount of ram, and that nice amd to jump around for it.

D.

JohnD
13-10-2004, 12:55 PM
My memory of 3.11 seems to be quite different!! I used it at home and on a two different Novell Netware 3.12 LANs and I have to say (in my experience) it was a dog!!

Heaps of crashes and lockups!! ... General Protection Errors, etc.

Remember - no protected mode and cooperative multitasking not pre-emptive as from 95 onwards. Win95 wasn't perfect by any means but it was a big improvement on the DOS\Win3.11 combination.

paulw
13-10-2004, 04:11 PM
I still have a copy of Windows 1.01 on a 1.4 floppy. (the old 5.25s died) I tried it again last year. Had to partition the HD to a 20Meg partition and install DOS 3.2 and it sort of worked OK. No splash screen though, something funny with ansi.sys.

Dolby Digital
13-10-2004, 09:23 PM
I presume Windows 1 ran on an 8088 (or was it an 8086) CPU. I suppose it must have run in 640K.

agent_24
13-10-2004, 10:45 PM
I downloaded Windows 1 off DC++ once, but never installed it.

I'm kinda glad that I didn't............. :D

JJJJJ
14-10-2004, 05:51 AM
And the amazing thing all this was only twenty years ago.
What I liked was no plug and play. You installed your drivers and that was it. No downloading new drivers every five minutes. In fact, no downloading anything.
A twelve inch monitor.and any resolution you liked as long as it was 640 x 480.
Ram at over $100 a meg.
DOS, I loved. I still have disks for DOS 6.11. Must try them one day and see if they will work on a Pentium 4.
My biggest laugh was reading an article about how hard it was to use DOS, having to remember all those commands. (All 40 of them) The same article went on to laud Word 6 and it's 120 keyboard shortcuts. I dillagently tried to remember them all. Used to spend more time looking up the shortcut than I did typing.
I still think the best computer I have ever owned was a 486 DX4 100. with a whole 32 megs of ram and a 400 meg hard disk. Running DOS 6.11 and Windows 3.1. And a "giant" 15 inch SVGA monitor. I could now use 800 x 600. Amazing!
Jack

ugh1
15-10-2004, 01:55 PM
> My memory of 3.11 seems to be quite different!! I
> used it at home and on a two different Novell Netware
> 3.12 LANs and I have to say (in my experience) it was
> a dog!!
>
> Heaps of crashes and lockups!! ... General Protection
> Errors, etc.
>
> Remember - no protected mode and cooperative
> multitasking not pre-emptive as from 95 onwards.
> Win95 wasn't perfect by any means but it was a big
> improvement on the DOS\Win3.11 combination.

I think m$ at the time was trying hard to insure that NetWare would not work with windows.

My 3.11 install worked well right up till I updated to win2k 2 years ago.

Pete O\'Neil
15-10-2004, 02:15 PM
Since Win 3.11 has such a small footprint and needs only a very small amount of RAM would it be possible to use some of you RAM as a RAM drive and load windows 3.11 to that? it would be super speedy.

Graham L
15-10-2004, 02:32 PM
Even on a 2MB machine I often used a ram disk to hold command.com and a few other files --- that made DOS really quick. There was the other trick which compressed .exe files, and removed the big zeroed buffer blocks. That made loading quite a bit quicker as long as the CPU decompression was quicker than the loading from disk.

Terry Porritt
15-10-2004, 04:34 PM
A great idea Peter, a bit of a search threw up this site with instructions for installing a ram drive:
http://www.jankie.net/soedesh/15.htm

It was interesting to read about using himem.sys from Win98 in Windows 3.11.

george12
15-10-2004, 10:00 PM
Windows 3.1 works with 4MB of RAM, that I know from experience.

george12
15-10-2004, 10:00 PM
I'm feeling crazy. I'm gonna install DOS and Win 3.1 on Virtual PC.

Terry Porritt
15-10-2004, 10:11 PM
:) :)

What have I started?

I have WFWG networked with Win98 and Win2000, but for some reason it cant see XP, and XP cant see WFWG, odd.

I've also installed some retro browsers like versions of Mosaic, Spry, Cello, and IE3.

Windows 1.01 on a Pentium 200MHz boots up too fast to measure, it's less than 1 second!

Jaguar
15-10-2004, 10:17 PM
Well, I love Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11, great OSs that can run Captain Comic and Crystal Caves with ease. I then put to you a question:

Where did they go wrong? :P

drb1
16-10-2004, 06:45 AM
> Well, I love Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11, great OSs
> that can run Captain Comic and Crystal Caves with
> ease. I then put to you a question:
>
> Where did they go wrong? :P

Instead of rectifying some small, at the time, issues releated to security/networking, and the internet.

Theyt tried to rob: apple, netscape, ibm, and take over the net. This lead to 10 + years of litigation and general scrapping, patent wars, and created the generall mess we have today.

Where it all is today, is not what anyone would really have wanted.

M/S may have the money, but they dont have the affinity of the people. This does not bode well for their future.

A point of view.

D.