Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows 1.0: the Power of DOS, Plus Tiled Windows

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the end-of-time-has-arrived dept.

Microsoft 249

jbrodkin writes "I'd always wanted my own working copy of the elusive Windows 1.0, and after a few failed attempts I got one working in a virtual machine (I had to downgrade from the latest version of Windows Virtual PC to an earlier version to get it started, but that's another story). With 416K free memory, we were able to cruise through Reversi, take a look at the first version of Notepad, as well as the now-defunct Microsoft Write, and create a 'masterpiece' in Microsoft Paint. Eventually, applications started crashing, but a simple reboot got it working again. All in all, a nice tour through computing history. Anyone have a copy of the first Macintosh OS they want to send me?"

cancel ×

249 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon?? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254318)

What's the deal with Slashdot still using that Bill Gates Borg icon to represent Microsoft? That icon is so dated on both levels these days. Bill Gates hasn't worked at Microsoft in years, and the Borg reference just is no longer current or relevant. Anyone under 25 would hardly get the references.

You guys just had a redesign, and you still can't deign to use the real Microsoft icon? For gods sake you have the real ones for Facebook and Twitter, it's not like its that hard. If anything, it makes slashdot just look so horribly unfunny and irrelevant.

This is an on-topic meta comment.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254428)

it makes it more funny

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254432)

The point is that it's now passed beyond satire into meta-satire; the satire is mostly on the fact that so many Slashdot commenters bemoan their portrayal as you do. The very reason it's still being used is probably because of that. Honestly, I see more comments complaining about how Slashdotters are always biased against MS than I see comments which are genuinely biased against them.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (3, Interesting)

softWare3ngineer (2007302) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254484)

I could go for a Ballmer Zombie instead.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (4, Insightful)

scharkalvin (72228) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254522)

Now THAT is a good idea. Actually does anybody beside me think that Ballmer looks like the monster from Young Frankenstein?

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254800)

I vote for a flying chair that is in a temporary state of suspension above a planar surface.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1, Insightful)

freedumb2000 (966222) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254586)

/. should just use a chair. *ducks* (literally)

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1, Insightful)

D'Sphitz (699604) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254674)

Do you have this rant saved in a text file on your desktop so you can quickly copy/paste it into any Windows story?

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254750)

Does repeatedly pasting the rant make it any less valid?

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (2, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254732)

They're keeping it solely to piss people like you off. It seems to be working.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254734)

Anyone under 25 wouldn't know what the Borg are? First, you're overreaching as I'm 26 and easily get the reference. Someone as much as 5-6 years younger than me would probably get it just fine. Second, even if they're younger than that, if they have never even heard of the Borg they probably aren't the type that comes here in the first place. Third, most people alive are 25 and over. I think it's fine.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254852)

I come here multiple times daily, I have no idea what the Borg reference is, Im also 24 years old. I'm either an utter failure or your comment was.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (2)

qubezz (520511) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254860)

I played the Picard song [youtube.com] on youtube to my 21 year old roommate. He asked 'what is pick-urd?'...

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254896)

The Borg are not limited to TNG. Voyager only ended in 2001, so it's not unreasonable to say that someone who is 20 years old has heard of the Borg from that.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36255056)

And a better designed one please. I saw all the series of Star Trek (from TOS to Enterprise), but the first time I saw Gates in that picture I did not immediatly related it to the Borg.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (2)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254792)

Because a sweaty Ballmer throwing chairs will not fit in a icon.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

Muros (1167213) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254836)

What's the deal with Slashdot still using that Bill Gates Borg icon to represent Microsoft? That icon is so dated on both levels these days. Bill Gates hasn't worked at Microsoft in years, and the Borg reference just is no longer current or relevant.

Methinks the Borg reference will be more relevant in the future than it has ever been. As for Bill working in Microsoft, some of the issues many people have had in the past with MSFT were related to money Bill Gates made from work other people did.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254856)

I'm 21 and fully understood the first time I saw that icon which was probably 2 or 3 years ago.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

froggymana (1896008) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255006)

I'm twelve and is this?

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36255276)

I'm twelve and what is this?

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (2)

FridayBob (619244) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254906)

Too late. That just means that the Bill Gates Borg icon is becoming part of Slashdot lore. Newbies may not understand immediately, but they will if they stick around long enough. Besides, if we didn't allow for this sort of thing, how could we ever expect to develop our own culture? If instead Slashdot just followed whatever was trendy, then I think our days would be numbered. Of course, this may also mean that we will eventually die out, our sizable membership finally dwindling to a small number of old kooks, but even then I'd rather be a member of this club than of one of the trendier ones that come and go.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

Simon80 (874052) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255066)

No! The borg reference is still quite relevant. Just because they can't EE&E anymore doesn't mean their mentality has changed. Look at OOXML or their Android patent extortion scheme. Same old Microsoft. Sure, their assimilation glory days are over, but they're still trying :)

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

Simon80 (874052) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255088)

Oh, and I forgot about the fact that they basically assimilated Nokia. What a tragedy that was.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36255094)

This is an on-topic meta comment.

No, it's not. It is, however, the third time I've seen this exact comment made word for word (apart from that last bit).

Try to see that this is a part of /. history now, and whatever nose-thumbing may have been intended in the past has now been diluted into a more friendly jab at Gates and the company he founded. Oh, and Have a Nice Day.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

FlyingGuy (989135) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255298)

Given that Gates was pushing the purchase of Skype with the board I think it is still appropriate.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (2)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255304)

The sad thing is that this Borg Gates icon was actually updated in the past few years. They went through the effort to redraw the icon even after its outdated. If they want to recycle a bad joke, do a Steve Jobs on for Apple. At least that would be relevant and actually make sense.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

PNutts (199112) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255332)

What's the deal with Slashdot still using that Bill Gates Borg icon to represent Microsoft? That icon is so dated on both levels these days. Bill Gates hasn't worked at Microsoft in years, and the Borg reference just is no longer current or relevant. Anyone under 25 would hardly get the references.

Resistance is futile.

Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? (1)

RL78 (1968236) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255376)

It's relevant to the post in that it's part of Microsoft's history at the very least, at the most it's not that serious, is it?

1.0 Post! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254322)

1.0 Post!

the "another story" (1)

djdanlib (732853) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254324)

Huh, I wonder what broke it with the newer version of Virtual PC.

Re:the "another story" (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254348)

Not enough bugs.

Re:the "another story" (2)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254382)

probably emulation of modern CPU too different from old XT/AT.
They did away with some of the oldest "features".

BTW, Dosbox would likely be better suited.

Re:the "another story" (2)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254714)

About 15 years ago I tried installing Windows 1.0 on a then-current computer (probably a 386 or 486) and couldn't get it to work. My guess at the time was that the VGA chipset of the machine was doing a poor job of emulating the EGA graphics modes that Windows 1.0 was trying to use for (but even already in those days no one actually cared enough to test), but it could have been any of a hundred devitations from the then-current "IBM PC/XT compatible" standard that Microsoft assumed it would be running on.

Re:the "another story" (1)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255338)

Here's a screenshot [angband.pl] from an accurate emulator.

The oldest machine I had at the time I took it was a 486 (in a corner of a cellar), but it crashed the same way as the emulator did. There was some error reading the 5 1/4 installation floppies, after several tries it finally claimed success, so it might have been data corruption rather than a problem with Windows, though. Still, it had the correct colour :p

Re:the "another story" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254420)

Huh, I wonder what broke it with the newer version of Virtual PC.

For a Microsoft product, I think the more relevant idea is what let it actually work in the first place.

Re:the "another story" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254696)

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, thats freaking hysterical! Oh wait, no it's not, shut the hell up.

Re:the "another story" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254436)

Could be anything: 16bit real mode, the old master/slave PIC, XT/ISA bus emulation, CGA adaptor, IDE controller...all things that any OS made in the last 15 years doesn't really care about, but something like DOS and Windows 1.0 really, really, would.

So huge hassle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254330)

I installed Win 1.0 and GEM to Virtualbox year ago without problems.

Re:So huge hassle? (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254646)

Me too :-) I've got a CD full of these old abandonware OS's somewhere and got most of them working.

Why the hell is this here? (-1, Flamebait)

DavidR1991 (1047748) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254332)

It isn't an "ask slashdot" or news, and it isn't even useful information. Yeah, you can put old OSes in a virtual machine. So what?

Re:Why the hell is this here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254480)

They put it here because they didn't think to ask you if it were OK. Get over yourself.

Re:Why the hell is this here? (1)

BeerCat (685972) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254508)

Windows technically wasn't an OS until Win 95 (although admittedly, it was kind of blurred by the time Windows 3.0 came out). Indeed, "MS-DOS Executive" was File Manager under another name (and was also, IIRC, available in MS-DOS 4.01 and possibly still there in MS-DOS 5.0)

Old OS in a VM. Hmmm. Now, old MacOS (pre OS 9.0) in a VM without using ROM iamges - that would be something

Re:Why the hell is this here? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254558)

It's nostalgia for those of us that actually used it.

Re:Why the hell is this here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36255308)

You actually used Windows 1.0?

Well, I do keep a Windows 3.11/DOS 6 PC in working order out of nostalgia. It wasn't easy to get a Pentium 60 with a PCI video card that had Win3x video drivers. Otherwise, I had an old Sound Blaster AWE64 and an old copy of QEMM so I can play all my old DOS games without an emulator. My wish list is for IBM to put OS/2 in the public domain and for someone to dig up "The Writer's Toolkit for Windows".

I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 (1)

SirGeek (120712) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254346)

I still have a complete set on 5 1/4 floppies for the Windows 2-86 version. No idea if they are even still readable at this point.

Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254756)

It wasn't '2-86', it was just '286', indicating that it was the version to use on Intel 80286-based (or similar AMD chips) systems, as opposed to Windows 386, which supported one or two 32-bit things from Intel's 80386 chip family.

Could you run Windows 386 on the 80386SX chips that still used 16-bit connections?

Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 (2)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254790)

The 5.25" floppies probably are. I have a number of vintage computers. In my experience you can pretty much count on properly stored 5.25" floppies to work. 3.5" floppies are almost entirely unreadable on the other hand.

working as designed (4, Funny)

OglinTatas (710589) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254350)

...after a few failed attempts I got one working.... Eventually, applications started crashing, but a simple reboot got it working again.

Sounds like you have it working as designed. Bravo.

Yep. (4, Funny)

wcrowe (94389) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254372)

Eventually, applications started crashing, but a simple reboot got it working again

Yep, that's Windows all right.

Re:Yep. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36255278)

Seriously, the most obvious joke possible, and it gets modded up?

I guess that a sense of humor is indeed relative, but clever is generally a good start to a joke...

What a masochist (2)

fragfoo (2018548) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254384)

BTW didn't the other guy upgraded from windows 1.0 to 7 making this even less relevant?

Re:What a masochist (1)

RDW (41497) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254424)

Re:What a masochist (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254426)

Yeah and he used a superior product, VMWare.

first blue screen! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254388)

tip: you can use my ass hairs to floss your teeth after you rim my asshole.

Heh, if you liked that (4, Funny)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254422)

If you liked that experience, you should check out the windows really good version

http://www.deanliou.com/WinRG/ [deanliou.com]

Re:Heh, if you liked that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254724)

That provided me the first really good laugh in weeks. Thank you!

I like it better than GNOME 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254444)

Kinda. Really.

Slideshows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254462)

I love slideshows. Specially when they are utterly irrelevant.

Oh and it's interrupted by full screen ads too!

Charming!

Google can be your best..... you know. (1)

Qwrk (760868) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254470)

There's a plethora of OS's out there, if you're willing to tap in some queries. Windows 1.0 on a single floppy, ApplePC v2.52, CP/M, Minix OS, OS2 v1.0, OS2 Warp Demo on 1 Disk...... you name'm.
This ain't Craiglist, is it?

sealed PC-DOS boxes anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254482)

I've got some sealed boxes of PC-DOS if anybody is interested. I forget which versions but I have a few different boxes. These were for an insurance company that I guess never opened them. I was cleaning out a closet and got to keep them.

Re:sealed PC-DOS boxes anyone? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254842)

Most places did that. I had 20 sealed boxes of DOS I threw away when I was a comcast employee. we bought all the copies and opened one to install on everything. works great. The same happened with NT and XP as well...

Re:sealed PC-DOS boxes anyone? (1)

qubezz (520511) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255286)

I win, I have MR-DOS 6.0 sealed, with the 4cm thick manual. Also have MS-DOS 5.0 manual, about 3cm thick. It's amazing when you can open a book to learn your OS instead of trying to type an applicable search term in help that will bring up a command reference, and then try to find some screen real estate to drag that to.

And around the same time (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254518)

GEOS was working on the Commodore 64 and the Amiga was multitasking multimedia in 512k... Yes indeed, computer "history" is all about MS and Apple... (rolls eyes) All we need now is a Space Nutter to claim that we only have computers and Teflon because of NASA and the circle of BS will be complete!

Original Macintosh OS: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254524)

http://www.linuxbeacon.com/doku.php?id=minivmac has a tutorial on Mac emulation. For the original OS in a disk image go to http://www.rolli.ch/MacPlus/welcome.html

If you want everything already set-up and don't mind a slightly newer (yet still ancient) Mac OS version, you can download a .zip that I made and is available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKN2r5iNZNI

Errors (3, Interesting)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254526)

It's amazing. The error dialogs and calculator have lasted on, virtually unchanged.

Re:Errors (1)

zoney_ie (740061) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255118)

Last time I checked, calculator in Windows 7 has a "programmer" mode as well as scientific and basic, that on first glance is helpful (swap between bases) but doesn't really allow you to do much calculation. If I'm not mistaken, they've also removed the functionality to switch between number bases in the scientific mode. And finally it doesn't keep your current calculation up when you swap modes.

Typical Windows; in theory helpful, in reality some special version of hell.

Although I'm fairly convinced at this stage that Linux and Apple software are just different versions of hell.

Windows 1.0 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254546)

If you want more junk, I have plenty at my place. I don't know about you guys, but I am really tired of the crap that Microsoft puts out. My next laptop will be a Macbook Pro.

Uh huh... (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254590)

But has Netcraft confirmed Windows 1.0 is dead?

QDOS? (DOS 1.0) (2)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254630)

I wonder where someone could find and run QDOS (DOS 1.0 that Gates bought and sold to IBM). "The "Microsoft Disk Operating System" or MS-DOS was based on QDOS, the "Quick and Dirty Operating System" written by Tim Paterson of Seattle Computer Products, for their prototype Intel 8086 based computer.

QDOS was based on Gary Kildall's CP/M, Paterson had bought a CP/M manual and used it as the basis to write his operating system in six weeks, QDOS was different enough from CP/M to be considered legal.

Microsoft bought the rights to QDOS for $50,000, keeping the IBM deal a secret from Seattle Computer Products." - About.com [about.com]

Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) (4, Informative)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254776)

Here [86dos.org] you go ! It's 86DOS but as wikipedia explains [wikipedia.org] :

"86-DOS was an operating system developed and marketed by Seattle Computer Products for its Intel 8086-based computer kit. Initially known as QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) the name was changed to 86-DOS once SCP started licensing the operating system."

Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) (0)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254806)

Mod up parent! Thanks!

Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) (1)

Scoth (879800) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255072)

The amazing thing is the programs in the archive run just fine on XP. Some of them I didn't let do much (like chkdsk and initlarg) because of what they might do, but they run fine.

wow. That page loads so much crap. Not gonna unblo (1)

fatbuckel (1714764) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254664)

Nope.

Mac OS 1 (1)

rapturizer (733607) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254672)

Not hard to find. My first Mac OS was 2.1 I think - it was a Mac 512k. Here's a link to get the image. http://www.nd.edu/~jvanderk/sysone/ [nd.edu]

Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! (1)

TheCouchPotatoFamine (628797) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254678)

The curse will never lift. They are doomed to UI fail forever. (it's verb/cancel, for youse unaware folk. always verb/cancel)

Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! (1)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255040)

(it's verb/cancel, for youse unaware folk. always verb/cancel)

What if you need to cancel your appointment? Cancel/Cancel?

Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36255162)

Are you sure you want to cancel? [ Yes ] [ Cancel ]

Doesn't really work does it?

Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! (1)

RJHelms (1554807) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255228)

What if it's "Are you sure you want to cancel the current operation"?

Cancel/cancel, then?

"wanted my own working copy of..." (1)

l3v1 (787564) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254698)

wanted my own working copy of the elusive Windows 1.0

It's not elusive. It's dead (good riddance).

My first Windows I ever came to use was 3, but of course I had to see and try previous versions as well back in the days. May them all rot in peace together.

Re:"wanted my own working copy of..." (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255100)

The first version of Windows I used was win95. I was happy with DOS, 6.2 was a good OS (I upgraded to that from 3.3 because of doublespace). It also came with an excellent text based shell, DOSShell. MS used to make pretty good stuff, but about the only MS program I don't loathe these days is Excel (even though I hate spreadsheets in general).

I got Win95 because of Road Rash. I just HAD to have that game!

I don't think you'll find a copy... (4, Interesting)

kevinmenzel (1403457) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254740)

I'm not sure that I've ever seen a copy of Windows 1.0, and I was REALLY in to old versions of windows at a point. 1.01, yes. 1.02, yes. 1.03, yes. 1.04, definitely (had that running native on a P4 though I forget how easy or difficult that was...) - but not the original 1.0. Apparently there was some sort of major bug with 1.0, or memory leak, or something. If anybody actually finds a copy somewhere though... that would be amazing. I've seen things claiming to be 1.0 that are just resource hacks of 1.01 or 1.04, (usually 1.04) so I know you can "find it on the google" but I have yet to see a confirmed 1.0 disk image anywhere on the net....

Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... (3, Insightful)

linebackn (131821) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255140)

>Apparently there was some sort of major bug with 1.0, or memory leak, or something.

There was an article linked to on Slashdot a while back that explained this. Here is the link:
http://technologizer.com/2010/03/08/the-secret-origin-of-windows/ [technologizer.com]

Windows 1.00 was not quite ready to release to the public but they had some obligation to release, so they branded 1.00 as Windows "Premier Edition" and gave that to certain people. Windows 1.01 was apparently the first version to actually hit the store shelves.

Some things never change (1)

six025 (714064) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254766)

take a look at the most recent version of Notepad

Sure it's basic, but if it aint broke ... ;-)

Write still present, at least as a proxy (3, Interesting)

morningstar8 (234758) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254768)

The original Write might have gone away...but there is still a proxy in its place.

If you look in Windows 7's \system32 directory, you will find good ol' write.exe. I believe the icon is the same one it had in the Win 95 days. If you look at the property dialog for the file, and click over to the Details tab, you'll see that the "File description" is "Windows Write". Even in Windows 7, one can invoke "write hello.txt" from the command line.

However, the executable is tiny, and it appears to simply invoke WordPad. The executable that shows up in Task Manager is "wordpad.exe".

Re:Write still present, at least as a proxy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254936)

I learn something today, thank you

Why is this news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254808)

Someone downloaded a floppy image of an old OS and ran it in an emulator. This is front page news?

GEOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254822)

Try GEOS for the Commodor 64. Now that's what I called primitive windows.

Still more usable than Linux. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36254830)

With Gnome and Unity throwing decades of HCI research out of the Window, Linux is doomed to lose even more of its 0.75% market share.

OS2 Warp was the best of them all. (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254912)

I really liked it until you found that most apps wont run...

Re:OS2 Warp was the best of them all. (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255314)

Well using Windows sets the bar pretty low. I mean is there an OS worse than DOS/Windows 3.1 and before? It was the worst most primptive OS on the market.

I am not saying this as a anti_MS zealot here, as I think Windows 7 is an excellent client OS. I just remember being in middle school and highschool and being dumbfounded on why Dos can't use more than 640k of ram and how I had to run Memmaker to trick device drivers and programs to use more ram. Then I found out it was so primptive it had to let the bios handle the keyboard. It was a braindead command.com interpretor and yet it stole the market!? Some here on slashdot are a fans of DOS so I dunno. The schools macs people laughed at but at least they could do real multimedia and cooperative multitasking and some basic real memory management.

Anyway Windows 1.0/DOS were pretty horrible and OS/2 may not have been even good but it sure looked great compared to the alternatives.

MacOS (1)

ecotax (303198) | more than 3 years ago | (#36254986)

To run an old version of MacOS, you can use vMac:
http://www.vmac.org/ [vmac.org]
You'll also need a Mac ROM file and a disk image with the MacOS version you'd like to run, but you should be able to find those as well.
I don't have version 1.0, but I do have version 1.1.

Ummm Why not just do it in DosBox? (1)

TavisJohn (961472) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255050)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi3yZU0LJFg [youtube.com]
It seems like the easier way to do it.

Re:Ummm Why not just do it in DosBox? (1)

BatGnat (1568391) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255344)

Thats what i was thinking. that's how i run my windows 3.1 installation. I have some old 16bit games (for pre-schoolers) that wont working 64bit Windows anymore.

Favorite Error Message (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36255108)

All Data Will Be Lost

                        OK

(Almost as good as "Keyboard Error press F1")

Re:Favorite Error Message (1)

BatGnat (1568391) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255372)

All Data Will Be Lost

OK

(Almost as good as "Keyboard Error press F1")

No, "All Data Will Be Lost" was just teaching you to accept the inevitable. I mean, you had to get used to it running windows.

MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad (1)

redelm (54142) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255134)

At the risk of unwanted attention or appearing as flamebait, I will say it again: MS-DOS was not all that bad.

Had MS-DOS been truly useless/horrible, it never would have caught on. And survived/persisted. Sure, it has deficiencies. But not so bad the Apps (which people buy hardware to run) couldn't be compelling.

MS-DOS is actually a pretty good program loader / boot environment plus filessystem and is still used as such and for BIOS flashing. Just please don't call it an Operating System, which it is not by any modern standard.

History? (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255180)

Windows 1.0 is the start of the beginning of the end. This is not a tour through history, it's a tour through modern history. It's like if a history buff went to the Clinton library and then proclaimed he had a tour through presidential history. Windows 1.0 is just the start of the tiny offshoot of computing known as Windows. Even on the micro computer offshoot of history you could be looking further back at S-100 bus computers with CP/M. What about mini computers, mainframes, Smalltalk-80, Multics, Unix System III. Instead of Reversi play a game of Adventure, Hunt the Wumpus, Zork, or even Star Trek on a PDP-10.

I have 128K Mac tapes (1)

methano (519830) | more than 3 years ago | (#36255238)

OK, off topic.

I don't have an OS or even the original Mac anymore, but I hung on to the two original cassette tapes that shipped with my 128K Mac. They're audio cassettes with some New Age music playing in the background describing all the neat stuff this new computer will do. I haven't listened to them for a while.

I wonder what they're worth.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>