Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ken T]

Yes, I know they have put in a lot of effort, its just they sometimes seem to be controlling things, which is a bit worrying. And how big will Vista be ?.  Remember the Atari where the whole OS was about 175Kbytes, and my CP/M machine before that which had a whole 64K of Ram !. Its all good fun.  

[TheBoy]

Yes, I know they have put in a lot of effort, its just they sometimes seem to be controlling things, which is a bit worrying. And how big will Vista be ?.  Remember the Atari where the whole OS was about 175Kbytes, and my CP/M machine before that which had a whole 64K of Ram !. Its all good fun.  

Vista will need the hardware requirements of a modern machine. In the same way as every OS before it...   ...the 64k CP/M machines had huge memory in their day...

What are MS controlling with their desktop OS?  I would be far more concerned with Verisign, and their control of the Internet - something they have already abused a couple of yrs back with their wildcard DNS (and broke it, and have publically stated they will reimplement).  I don't see the media, or the usual vocal anti-monopoly, anti MS, EU beaurocrats etc etc moaning about that.

[Markjay]

Yes, I know they have put in a lot of effort, its just they sometimes seem to be controlling things, which is a bit worrying. And how big will Vista be ?.  Remember the Atari where the whole OS was about 175Kbytes, and my CP/M machine before that which had a whole 64K of Ram !. Its all good fun.  

Some of the equipment I get to work on is propriety kit operating CNC machines on the production line. I recently replaced an aging 286 PC running Windows 3.11 with a new Dell Optiplex (Core 2 Duo, SATA 300, etc). Out of interest, I decided to compare the performance on both PCs. The new Dell takes 33 second from boot to fully load Windows XP. The 286 takes exactly 3 second to load Windows 3.11. And that’s progress….

[TheBoy]

Yes, I know they have put in a lot of effort, its just they sometimes seem to be controlling things, which is a bit worrying. And how big will Vista be ?.  Remember the Atari where the whole OS was about 175Kbytes, and my CP/M machine before that which had a whole 64K of Ram !. Its all good fun.  

Some of the equipment I get to work on is propriety kit operating CNC machines on the production line. I recently replaced an aging 286 PC running Windows 3.11 with a new Dell Optiplex (Core 2 Duo, SATA 300, etc). Out of interest, I decided to compare the performance on both PCs. The new Dell takes 33 second from boot to fully load Windows XP. The 286 takes exactly 3 second to load Windows 3.11. And that’s progress….

Did that include the boot in DOS first?

Could a 286 run 3.11 - thought they removed 286 support from 3.1 or 3.11 - sure it wasn't Windows 3.0?

For a laugh, I installed Windows 1.0 on a VM running on a P4 host. That did load quick....

[Markjay]

Yes, I know they have put in a lot of effort, its just they sometimes seem to be controlling things, which is a bit worrying. And how big will Vista be ?.  Remember the Atari where the whole OS was about 175Kbytes, and my CP/M machine before that which had a whole 64K of Ram !. Its all good fun.  

Some of the equipment I get to work on is propriety kit operating CNC machines on the production line. I recently replaced an aging 286 PC running Windows 3.11 with a new Dell Optiplex (Core 2 Duo, SATA 300, etc). Out of interest, I decided to compare the performance on both PCs. The new Dell takes 33 second from boot to fully load Windows XP. The 286 takes exactly 3 second to load Windows 3.11. And that’s progress….

Did that include the boot in DOS first?

Could a 286 run 3.11 - thought they removed 286 support from 3.1 or 3.11 - sure it wasn't Windows 3.0?

For a laugh, I installed Windows 1.0 on a VM running on a P4 host. That did load quick....

Yes including dos, win.exe running from autoexec, but timed from when the BIOS messages disappear. I think it was 3.11, good point there, will check again when I’m next on site....

[TheBoy]

Yes, I know they have put in a lot of effort, its just they sometimes seem to be controlling things, which is a bit worrying. And how big will Vista be ?.  Remember the Atari where the whole OS was about 175Kbytes, and my CP/M machine before that which had a whole 64K of Ram !. Its all good fun.  

Some of the equipment I get to work on is propriety kit operating CNC machines on the production line. I recently replaced an aging 286 PC running Windows 3.11 with a new Dell Optiplex (Core 2 Duo, SATA 300, etc). Out of interest, I decided to compare the performance on both PCs. The new Dell takes 33 second from boot to fully load Windows XP. The 286 takes exactly 3 second to load Windows 3.11. And that’s progress….

Did that include the boot in DOS first?

Could a 286 run 3.11 - thought they removed 286 support from 3.1 or 3.11 - sure it wasn't Windows 3.0?

For a laugh, I installed Windows 1.0 on a VM running on a P4 host. That did load quick....

Yes including dos, win.exe running from autoexec, but timed from when the BIOS messages disappear. I think it was 3.11, good point there, will check again when I’m next on site....

Long time ago, can't really remember, but sure they only had 386 support in later vers of Win 3.  Maybe WFW only? Can't remember.

[Martin_1962]

Windows 3.1 can run in a DOS session of Real/32

[TheBoy]

Windows 3.1 can run in a DOS session of Real/32

Yes, but the question was, can a 286 run later versions of Win3?

[omegaV6CD]

My PC hasn't arrived yet, i'm going crazy as i don't have any music to listen too at the moment.

[Taxi_Driver]

Windows 3.1 can run in a DOS session of Real/32

Yes, but the question was, can a 286 run later versions of Win3?

I carnt remember either   i know i had a pc running win3.1 and then later 3.11 but carnt remember if it was a 286 or 386.....come on TB your younger than me....you should be able to remember  

[Martin_1962]

Windows 3.1 can run in a DOS session of Real/32

Yes, but the question was, can a 286 run later versions of Win3?

Hmmm

I think there is actually - as it was possible to run WFW on Real/32 as well and that was in a cut down mode - I am pretty sure it was 286 mode - I'll have a quick search .......
..............
............
............
............
http://kb.iu.edu/data/abyr.html

Yup I was right

[TheBoy]

Windows 3.1 can run in a DOS session of Real/32

Yes, but the question was, can a 286 run later versions of Win3?

Hmmm

I think there is actually - as it was possible to run WFW on Real/32 as well and that was in a cut down mode - I am pretty sure it was 286 mode - I'll have a quick search .......
..............
............
............
............
http://kb.iu.edu/data/abyr.html

Yup I was right

Haven't looked at link, but fairly sure Real/32 needed 386. Too long ago for me

[TheBoy]

Win3 was released with 3 modes:
Real for 8086
Standard for 286
Enhanced for 386

I know that real was dropped from 3.1, but cannot remember if Standard was....

[Martin_1962]

Windows 3.1 can run in a DOS session of Real/32

Yes, but the question was, can a 286 run later versions of Win3?

Hmmm

I think there is actually - as it was possible to run WFW on Real/32 as well and that was in a cut down mode - I am pretty sure it was 286 mode - I'll have a quick search .......
..............
............
............
............
http://kb.iu.edu/data/abyr.html

Yup I was right

Haven't looked at link, but fairly sure Real/32 needed 386. Too long ago for me

That I so know but ours was 486 DX50 - but you could happily run Windows in a shell 3.1 I was certain about but 3.11 I was unsure. I just remember a session had similar characteristics as a 286, and that it could run DOS apps well including Windows 3.1. If you were mad enough you could run Xenon2 and Windows 3.1 on the same machine at the same time, but the graphics went a bit mad when changing screens