| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 50158 | 2004-10-12 04:30:00 | Windows, the way it used to be!!! | Terry Porritt (14) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 280450 | 2004-10-12 04:30:00 | 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 (sal.neoburn.net) when you type win from the C:\Windows prompt. The next one is the Paint (sal.neoburn.net) program. And just one more, the the clock (sal.neoburn.net), 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 (14) | ||
| 280451 | 2004-10-12 04:40:00 | Maybe just to prove this really is Windows here is the shutdown screen (sal.neoburn.net) | Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 280452 | 2004-10-12 06:45:00 | Does it blue screen Terry or does it go to the dreaded flashing prompt on a black screen? Cheers Murray P |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 280453 | 2004-10-12 07:20:00 | 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. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 280454 | 2004-10-12 07:49:00 | > 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 |
Jacob4165 (199) | ||
| 280455 | 2004-10-12 07:58:00 | Ah yes, Windows 3.11 <50Mb footprint, 10 second bootups, fast and stable. How things have changed! |
b1naryb0y (3) | ||
| 280456 | 2004-10-12 08:34:00 | > Ah yes, Windows 3.11 > > <50Mb footprint, 10 second bootups, fast and stable. > How things have changed! Want a copy? D. |
drb1 (4492) | ||
| 280457 | 2004-10-12 09:42:00 | >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 |
Jacob4165 (199) | ||
| 280458 | 2004-10-12 10:48:00 | 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. |
drb1 (4492) | ||
| 280459 | 2004-10-12 23:55:00 | 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. |
JohnD (509) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||