Slashdot Mirror


Screenshot History of Windows

jobugeek writes "Neowin has an article that shows the progression of Microsoft Windows from pre-windows 1.0 through the 2003 server. For those of you who have used all of them, I'm sorry."

3 of 683 comments (clear)

  1. win95..... by vvikram · · Score: 5, Interesting


    looking at all of them one thing really
    strikes you, win95 was quite a leap.
    till then it really was not close to
    a usable desktop. win95 was the racehorse...

  2. The lies prepetuated by Safety+Cap · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From the site:
    It [Windows 95] is no longer a graphic user interface on MS-DOS, but a complete operating system. Although users can see a regular MS-DOS window in the boot process, the system takes over MS-DOS 7.0 after it's loaded completely.
    Nope, sorry. Windows 9x is still DOS with a quick switch over to the graphical shell.

    If you have your old copy of Windows 95 System Programming Secrets (1995, Matt Pietrek) handy, he has some examples of how those pesky Int 21 calls (DOS services) are still thunked down to that crappy old DOS layer, instead of being completely handled in the kernal, as in WinNT. If there was truely no DOS, there would be no thunking, no crappy DOS layer, and no MSDOS.SYS/IO.SYS/COMMAND.COM garbage.

    Microsoft's marketing machine tried (and mostly managed) to convince the world that 'DOS is dead' with this version of Windows. Rumor has it that BillG got totally hacked off by an Apple commerical that compared booting a Mac with booting a WIntel box, and told his minions that the next version (95) better boot right to Windows.

    --
    Yeah, right.
  3. Jesus by tedrlord · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is the first time I actually noticed the dates on all this software.

    Back in the late-eighties/early-nineties I only knew Macs. I had family that worked at Apple so I had access to a lot of stuff. I finally moved over to a PC in 1998, when I got tired of connecting to shell accounts and wanted to get my own unix machine.

    Anyway, I can't believe the dates here. I always assumed that Windows 3.1 came out in 87/88, what with the horrible interface and lack of features. I remember playing with a Mac 128k in 1985 that worked better than 3.1, minus the color.

    It really makes me wonder what they were thinking at Apple back then, making the machines so expensive rather than trying to take over the market when they had such a lead. It boggles the mind.

    --
    [insert witty quote here]