Slashdot Mirror


Windows 1.0: the Power of DOS, Plus Tiled Windows

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?"

249 comments

  1. Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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 Bill Gates hasn't worked at Microsoft in years, and the Borg reference just is no longer current or relevant.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.

  2. 1.0 Post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    1.0 Post!

  3. the "another story" by djdanlib · · Score: 1

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

    1. Re:the "another story" by somersault · · Score: 1

      Not enough bugs.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:the "another story" by SharpFang · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    3. Re:the "another story" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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.

    4. Re:the "another story" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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.

    5. Re:the "another story" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    6. Re:the "another story" by tverbeek · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    7. Re:the "another story" by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      Here's a screenshot 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

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    8. Re:the "another story" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used DOS 5.0 on an E6700 Core 2 Duo.

      AT stuff and BIOS is still fully intact. It's even been expanded - the extended INT13 interface gives 64-bit LBA to DOS drives. Plus long file names when running under a host OS that supports that (95/98etc)

      I have no doubt that would work on my i7. Perhaps I'll try that this weekend. I don't have anything EFI-based for Intel, but the presence of "protective MBR" data on EFI/GPT drives suggest that they *might* also support PC/AT booting. It would be sad if they didn't though, as I doubt that portion takes more than 20k of ROM space.

    9. Re:the "another story" by smudj · · Score: 1

      Virtual PC does not emulate the CPU, the Windows version never has, only the Mac version did CPU emulation.

    10. Re:the "another story" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just go douche, you smelly bitch.

    11. Re:the "another story" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Virtual PC does too emulate the CPU on Windows but only if it cannot do virtualization. If it can't virtualize, it will fall back to slow emulation.

    12. Re:the "another story" by Retron · · Score: 1

      I booted DOS 7.1 (ie the DOS from Windows 98) on this i7-2600 with EFI. It only showed a max of 624KB base RAM (rather than the more normal 640KB) but aside from that it worked exactly as you'd expect.

  4. So huge hassle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    1. Re:So huge hassle? by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

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

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    2. Re:So huge hassle? by slick7 · · Score: 1

      I still have Windows 1.0 in the original box. The only thing missing is Mr. Gates' autograph. And no, it's not for sale.
      I also have 3.0, 3.1 and 3.11.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    3. Re:So huge hassle? by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      You should make the VMs available somewhere so we don't end up with everyone posting about their huge success in managing it! Plus it would be amusing to go back and look for yourself, for 5 mins max, I expect.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    4. Re:So huge hassle? by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Nah, the pain in the ass of getting them to work is the core of the experience, makes it more authentic ;-)

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
  5. I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by SirGeek · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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?

    2. Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by Hatta · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by slick7 · · Score: 1

      I keep my 5.25 floppy drive just to screw with people by using an obsolete media format that fewer people have heard of let alone use.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    4. Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      Agreed, I have 5.25's from as early as 1984 that work flawlessly, 3.5's on the other hand sometimes wont make it across town before crapping out

      IMO the 3.5 media is just too thin

    5. Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Have Windows 1.03 on 5.25" floppies.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    6. Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still have an unopened box of the original Windows in my desk.

    7. Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I have the entire retail box set. The outer box is a little tattered from travel, but I have the complete package, all manuals, disks, etc. I have thought about shilling it on eBay. I also have a full complete copy of one of the first good third-party apps that came out for Windows. Micrografx In-A-Vision, which evolved into Micrografx Designer (which Corel has now snuffed out.) In-A-Vision included a runtime version of Windows 1 in the package, because back then app vendors had to do stuff like that.

    8. Re:I still have a copy of Windows 2 x86 by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      I have a big stack of 3.5" floppies originally used on an Amiga, and most of them still work... They've been stored in a loft which sees highly variable temperatures.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  6. working as designed by OglinTatas · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...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.

  7. Yep. by wcrowe · · Score: 4, Funny

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

    Yep, that's Windows all right.

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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...

    2. Re:Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be my guest, Clowno the hilarious.

  8. What a masochist by fragfoo · · Score: 2

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

    --
    Sig? Heil
    1. Re:What a masochist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah and he used a superior product, VMWare.

    2. Re:What a masochist by meza · · Score: 2

      That was surprisingly fascinating to watch. I'm really impressed with how backwards compatible the windows platform is. I love my MacBook but I hate how even the most basic programs seem to always require the latest version of MacOS to run so that you are forced to upgrade. I admit this is more like "forward compatibility" though.

  9. Heh, if you liked that by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Funny

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

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

    1. Re:Heh, if you liked that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    2. Re:Heh, if you liked that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what the password to the windows folder is...

      Tried "administrator password", but it's too long by 2 chars... noticed it's misspelled, so tried "administ_ator password", but still too long of course...

    3. Re:Heh, if you liked that by right_writes · · Score: 1

      Sorry mate, no can do... I'm using an iPad... No Flash!

  10. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  11. I like it better than GNOME 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kinda. Really.

  12. Slideshows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love slideshows. Specially when they are utterly irrelevant.

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

    Charming!

  13. Google can be your best..... you know. by Qwrk · · Score: 1

    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?

  14. Re:Why the hell is this here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

  15. sealed PC-DOS boxes anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    1. Re:sealed PC-DOS boxes anyone? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      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...

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:sealed PC-DOS boxes anyone? by qubezz · · Score: 1

      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.

    3. Re:sealed PC-DOS boxes anyone? by Per+Wigren · · Score: 1

      That's nothing. I have a retail box for DiskMaster 1.0 for AmigaOS still wrapped in plastic. I also have Microsoft MultiPlan for CP/M on 8" diskettes. :-)

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
  16. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by softWare3ngineer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I could go for a Ballmer Zombie instead.

  17. Re:Why the hell is this here? by BeerCat · · Score: 1

    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

    --
    "She's furniture with a pulse"
  18. And around the same time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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!

    1. Re:And around the same time by Bryan3000000 · · Score: 1

      GEOS on Commodore 64 sucked. Slower and crappier than real software on the 64, with more 5 1/4" disk swaps, and practically no available software. I never figured out why it was developed. C64 games were the best though.

    2. Re:And around the same time by mc6809e · · Score: 1

      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!

      The trouble for Microsoft, though, was that there really wasn't cheap hardware graphics acceleration for the PC until the 90's. It was next to impossible in 1985 to have a multitasking windowing system without some additional help from the hardware. Microsoft could have done a much better job had PC's in 1985 looked like Amigas 1985 (from a hardware standpoint).

    3. Re:And around the same time by westlake · · Score: 1

      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)

      Microsoft prospered with the modular design of the PC and the evolution of mass-market hardware upgrades produced for the IBM PC and PC clone.

      The plug-in card that takes audio from 8 bit to 16 bit.

      Microsoft prospered with the discovery that your home office PC could also play games. That was - and remains - a potent one-two punch in the consumer market.

  19. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by scharkalvin · · Score: 4, Insightful

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

  20. Original Macintosh OS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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

  21. Errors by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 3, Interesting

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

    --
    I8-D
    1. Re:Errors by zoney_ie · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
    2. Re:Errors by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      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.

      Unless they changed it in 7, it works just fine in XP calculator. The base is settable from binary, decimal, octal and hex, and it'll convert the current value on screen to whatever the current base is.

      It doesn't do floating point in anything but decimal though.

    3. Re:Errors by g253 · · Score: 1

      I haven't tried it but apparently the OSX calculator has an RPN mode. Pretty awesome imho.

    4. Re:Errors by zoney_ie · · Score: 1

      Yes, they changed the calculator in Windows 7. That's really all I was saying in response to the commentator who said calc was unchanged.

      It kind of degenerated into a bit of a rant.

      --
      -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
    5. Re:Errors by torako · · Score: 1

      It also has Grapher.app, which is actually quite an amazing little plot program (also does differential equations and vector plots).

    6. Re:Errors by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      In Windows 7, they basically broke it into 3 disjointed calculators (standard, scientific, and programmer) by subdividing the features in the old "scientific" mode and splitting it into two. And you can't access all of the features from a single mode any more.

      Switching between bases is a function in the "programmer" mode; you can't switch between bases in the "scientific" mode, and you can't access most of the "scientific" functions from the "programmer" mode. And when you switch from one mode to another mode, it forgets the value that it was displaying. So GP was completely correct. It's quite irritating, actually.

    7. Re:Errors by robsku · · Score: 1

      Gnome seems to also have calculator wth basic, advanced, scientifical, financial and programming modes - have not tried them though, I like bc on command line...

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
  22. Windows 1.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

  23. Re:Why the hell is this here? by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 4, Insightful

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

    --

    Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

  24. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by freedumb2000 · · Score: 1, Insightful

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

  25. Uh huh... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    But has Netcraft confirmed Windows 1.0 is dead?

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  26. QDOS? (DOS 1.0) by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 2

    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

    --
    I8-D
    1. Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here you go ! It's 86DOS but as wikipedia explains :

      "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."

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    2. Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 0

      Mod up parent! Thanks!

      --
      I8-D
    3. Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) by Scoth · · Score: 1

      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.

    4. Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) by jelle · · Score: 2

      You probably now have a boot sector virus.

      Remember those?

      --
      --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
    5. Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      I remember getting the Saddam virus on my Amiga, now both the man and the platform are ancient history ... if you'll excuse, me I have some heavy drinking to do.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    6. Re:QDOS? (DOS 1.0) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft and SCP were DRI OEMs as they both sold CP/M based systems, MS sold an Apple II Z80 add in card with CP/M. Both had all the tools and code that DRI provided to OEMs.

      At the time there were 'decompilers' for various software, including one for CP/M BDOS. This output commented 8080 assembler code even though the original was written in PL/M. Intel had 8080 to 8086 converters which output 8086 assembler.

      It has been alleged that SCP used the 'decompiler' output and put it through Intel's converter to arrive at the 0.1 version of QDOS. They used QDOS when developing their Zebra S100 based 8086 systems. They could build the system using a Z80 card running CP/M then swap this out and replace it with an 8086 card to boot under QDOS. This implied that QDOS initially used a CP/M file system.

      Later they swapped out CP/M disk layout and replaced it with MS's FAT system that had been developed for Stand-Alone BASIC for DEC.

      It is alleged that when IBM was ready to release PC-DOS Gary Kildall demonstrated that PC-DOS 1.0 would display a DRI copyright notice. This caused IBM to a) rewrite DOS to 1.1, b) Settle with DRI, c) sell CP/M-86 alongside PC-DOS, d) Grant DRI the right to use and PC-DOS facility in their products. It is the last that allowed DRI to produce DR-DOS with FAT system and not be sued by MS.

      When SCP granted rights on 86-DOS to MS part of the payment was that SCP could sell as many copies of MS-DOS with no payment to MS as long as they were sold with a computer. After the factory was burned down they started selling a copy of MS-DOS plus a NEC V20 CPU. They got the MS-DOS for free so they made a good profit. MS bought them out to stop this, allegedly for a million dollars.

  27. wow. That page loads so much crap. Not gonna unblo by __aavqan3009 · · Score: 1

    Nope.

  28. Mac OS 1 by rapturizer · · Score: 1

    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/

  29. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by D'Sphitz · · Score: 1, Insightful

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

  30. Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

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

    --
    CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
    1. Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! by Qzukk · · Score: 1

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

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

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    2. Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      Doesn't really work does it?

    3. Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! by RJHelms · · Score: 1

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

      Cancel/cancel, then?

    4. Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WANT / DO NOT WANT

    5. Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Commence cancel/Cancel cancel

    6. Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer the opposite - Cancel / Accept

      The lower right corner is easiest to find with the mouse (from UX perspective for a right-handed person) so that should be where the default "yes, I do actually want to do this" happens.

      That's the way Gnome apps are (or maybe used to be? haven't messed with the Gnome3 stuff much yet) designed, and it seems like a good idea.

    7. Re:Using the stupid yes/no dialogue back then too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually find the new buttons more confusing.
      It used to be the case that you could glance the question and you knew which button to click.
      Now the buttons have different names in each dialogue box and often non-standard orders as well (Inkscape, I'm looking at you).

  31. "wanted my own working copy of..." by l3v1 · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    1. Re:"wanted my own working copy of..." by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      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!

    2. Re:"wanted my own working copy of..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck yeah! I still play it.

  32. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2
  33. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

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

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  34. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  35. I don't think you'll find a copy... by kevinmenzel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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....

    1. Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... by linebackn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >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/

      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.

    2. Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      Slide 3 clearly shows he is running 1.01

    3. Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Subby was asking for a copy of early Mac OS, not a copy of Windows 1.00. He installed 1.01 and didn't seem to realize that it wasn't 1.00.

    4. Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... by kesuki · · Score: 1

      it showed as 1.01 in the slideshow. oh and he thought the 'write' program got phased out -- it didn't it was renamed wordpad.

    5. Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      some things never change.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    6. Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The oldest version of Windows on the internal archive share is 1.03. The date modified on SETUP.EXE is 6/30/1986.

      Good times.

    7. Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to confirm this, since a few days after Windows shipped we walked down to the local egghead, and saw windows running. While the salesman was busy, we backed up the hard disk ( Windows and DOS was the only thing on it ), and restored it onto a Hard disk at home. Windows 1.01 was the first shipping windows, and almost everything except windows apps had memory leaks. 1.03 was a much more stable release and could run for most of a work day.

      The MacOS was fairly simple too, the first version, had oval holes on the floppy disks, just like the first 3.5 in Sony Floppies. It was changed soon after System 1.1g, with the release of System 2.0, but it could run for weeks, and could still boot on much later machines. ( SE/30s )

      Now, if you can name the successor to the Dungeons of Doom... you were there.

    8. Re:I don't think you'll find a copy... by robsku · · Score: 1

      I thought that Write was a rewritten as Wordpad, much like Paintbrush was replaced by Paint in Win 95. Yes, I know that Win 1.x came with Paint but 3.0 that we had in early 90's came with Paintbrush windows version - I hated Win95's Paint because it was literally worth nothing while Paintbrush you could actually use for some simple stuff (I even copied it from our old 286 with DOS 5.0 + Win 3.0 to Win95). I recall that Wordpad also lacked some functionality Write had provided.

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
  36. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does repeatedly pasting the rant make it any less valid?

  37. Some things never change by six025 · · Score: 1

    take a look at the most recent version of Notepad

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

  38. Write still present, at least as a proxy by morningstar8 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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".

    1. Re:Write still present, at least as a proxy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I learn something today, thank you

    2. Re:Write still present, at least as a proxy by webrunner · · Score: 2

      Wordpad is basically Write- they more or less just renamed the application for 95.

      --
      ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
    3. Re:Write still present, at least as a proxy by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      And the reason why that is the case is because most installers on 16-bit Windows era (3.x and below), would shell "write.exe readme.txt" to pop up the readme to the user after install finished. So this remains there as a compatibility shim of sorts.

      Even after Win95 some kept doing that for applications which had both 16-bit and 32-bit versions in one package, because you knew it'd work on either OS.

      But, well, there's a lot of those ghosts of days long gone in Windows today, some much, much older. For example, in that same system32, even on Windows 7 64-bit, you will find diskcopy.com - an utility that does sector-by-sector copy of a floppy drive. The really funny thing is that, if you view the file, you'll see that it is actually a Win32 console executable (complete with "This program cannot be run in DOS mode", XML assembly manifest, and a version number 6.1.7600). And, it still works. The reason why it has .com extension is because some twenty year old .bat file might be calling it that way...

      (Just don't ask me why, in x64 versions, write.exe and diskcopy.com exist in both SysWOW64 and in System32!)

      Too bad QBasic is no longer there.

    4. Re:Write still present, at least as a proxy by robsku · · Score: 1

      Too bad QBasic is no longer there.

      Yup, no more Gorillas - or nibbles modified to make the worm insanely long for laughs after smoking some.... Though I dont run Windows myself anyway and if I wanted I could copy QBasic files from old MS DOS disks I still have into virtual C:\ directory for dosbox :)

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
    5. Re:Write still present, at least as a proxy by ickoonite · · Score: 1

      And likewise Paintbrush (pbrush.exe), which became Paint (mspaint.exe).

      To this day, I still type 'pbrush' into Run to start Paint.

  39. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Lumpy · · Score: 2

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

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  40. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

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

  41. Why is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

  42. GEOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

  43. Still more usable than Linux. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    1. Re:Still more usable than Linux. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whateva if you don't like it, the source is there. Compile something more to your liking.

  44. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Muros · · Score: 1

    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.

  45. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

  46. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

  47. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by qubezz · · Score: 2

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

  48. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  49. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by FridayBob · · Score: 2

    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.

  50. OS2 Warp was the best of them all. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

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

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:OS2 Warp was the best of them all. by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:OS2 Warp was the best of them all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was a 2.1 kind of guy. It had windows built in...

      But yeah pretty much not much to run in it as I had about 0 dollars at the time and only lucked into 2.1 for 30 bucks by using a bunch of discounts.

  51. MacOS by ecotax · · Score: 1

    To run an old version of MacOS, you can use vMac:
    http://www.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.

    --
    "Money is a sign of poverty." - Iain Banks
    1. Re:MacOS by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1

      I loved how the Mac OS for years and years just consisted of two files, System and Finder (while Windows needed a few hundred files on a handful of floppies).

      I still keep my original floppies for Apple ANSI Pascal v1.0, Microsoft Excel v1.0, and even a beta of MS Flight Simulator and a few other things. I don't think any of the floppies are readable any longer, though, and the Pascal floppy is mounted in a display frame next to my home workstation (being that I'm a professional software developer now and that's THE floppy that got me started).

    2. Re:MacOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting, I notice that Mini vMac seems to be a continuation of vMac which seems to have given up any further work.

  52. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by froggymana · · Score: 1

    I'm twelve and is this?

    --
    "To prevent this day from getting any worse, I'll just read ERROR as GOOD THING" 1GJU8xLuDKDxEs4KLf8fAGyptoDsqvEsBT
  53. Ummm Why not just do it in DosBox? by TavisJohn · · Score: 1

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

  54. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

  55. Apple archives since the 6.0 days by davidwr · · Score: 1
    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  56. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Simon80 · · Score: 1

    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 :)

  57. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Simon80 · · Score: 1

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

  58. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

  59. Favorite Error Message by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All Data Will Be Lost

                            OK

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

    1. Re:Favorite Error Message by BatGnat · · Score: 1

      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.

  60. MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by redelm · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS-DOS flourished because it was the cheapest option when the PC was introduced and then, like Windows, it was included on nearly every PC purchased. Other than the file system it's no better than the BIOS that it depends on.

      That being said it's likely the earliest non-Unix OS with a hierarchical file system and even with the stupid 8.3 filename limitations, I'll give it that.

    2. Re:MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... How is this not flamebait? The story is about Windows 1.01, not MS-DOS.

      But this is /., so okay let's suit up:

      MS-DOS was fine. It was small, fast, stable, and yes /persists/, at least in derivatives like FreeDOS, and sometimes just running old hardware that hasn't needed replacement yet. (The controllers of a telescope array come to mind. Bunch of 486 boxes that output the data to a Linux unit. Works fine. Lets new money be spent on new arrays.)

      Digital Research dragged their heels putting CP/M on intel, and getting it to do hierarchal files, or decent disk handling. So others got on with the job, and yeah we got QDOS -> 86-DOS -> MS-DOS. The gory details of exactly who did what to whom will likely never be agreed on, but that's a decent thumbnail.

      And there is really nothing wrong with MS-DOS. It ran fine. It had haters, sure, but so did Unix back then. But it was never the crashy SOB that Windows was, and should never be painted with the same brush.

      And if you don't want to call it "modern" OS, fine I guess if you want to exclude embedding. But it's entirely useful for that, and has enormous amounts of existing code for the device engineer to leverage. It's not going to disappear for a while yet.

      It should really be thought of as like Fortran and COBOL; misunderstood in mainstream mythology, while actually being pretty good and thus surviving in niches just fine.

    3. Re:MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

      Before getting to the PC in the very early 90s, I came from a Commodore Amiga background where you'd always been encouraged to fiddle with the OS due to the sheer amount of shareware and freeware that you could get for it. At the same time I started to cut my teeth in UNIX which has ended up with me being a mostly Linux guy these days, again as an OS fiddler.

      I've also been through the MS-DOS and Windows iterations from Windows 3.11 to Windows XP (can't see a reason to go beyound XP at the moment) and fiddled with them a lot also. MS-DOS could be a complete pain to set up with PC gaming, especially if you were trying to get MS-DOS to boot up with selectable driver combinations and memory configurations to allow as many games as possible to work. But I quite enjoyed fiddling about with it and I've no doubt that writing DOS batch files helped me in my skills today in shell, Perl & Python scripting. So from that perspective, I have a great fondness for it and keep meaning to run DOS 6.22 up in a VM just to have a play around again.

      However, I've also been in the telecoms industry for 30 years, and remember a particular occasion when I had the unfortunate experience of having to fix problems on an MS-DOS based voicemail & interactive response system that was installed on a customer site here in the UK. It was working in a major customer's call centre and kept repeatedly crashing, to the point where me and another engineer spent alternating weeks on site over about three months just hitting the reset button on the system every hour or so when it bombed out. The poor server had to load all manner of drivers for networking and station/trunk interface cards even before the big application was then loaded up on it - no wonder it was so unstable.

      Fortunately, the product never really saw the light of day and was ripped out and replaced with another server (running SCO UNIX, now there's a name from the past!) and that worked much better.

      Even though, at the time, I missed the great hardware multitasking and Workbench on the Amiga, I did like messing about with MS-DOS on home systems - but for anything more serious, it was crap and I don't mourn its passing.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    4. Re:MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, it calls itself an operating system, that wasn't us.

    5. Re:MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by DesScorp · · Score: 1

      DOS was a pretty good OS for low end hardware. Unlike a Unix clone, it was never meant to be a server, and so it didn't really need multitasking. It was simple, stable, and once you learned the various commands, easy to use. My only gripe about it was the memory limitations.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    6. Re:MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS-DOS was horrible. FAT file system was horrible.

      Early MS-DOS had a fault where if you swapped a floppy it didn't notice and subsequently updated the new floppy with the old one's FAT table and directory entries that had been cached corrupting both.

      The FAT system was (and is) extremely bad at accessing individual records in large files. In order to get to a specific address withing the file it must start at the directory entry and follow every FAT entry until it finds the sector required. I used to run multi-megabyte files and could create the partition with large cluster sizes. This would make the programs run 3 times faster because there were fewer FAT entries to troll through. MS-DOS would create as small a cluster size as possible, thus slowest systems.

      MS-DOS was the last to 'break the '32MByte barrier' of disk size and partition size. IBM, Wyse, Compaq and others had already done this to their OEM versions.

      DRI's DR-DOS 5.x was significantly better than any contemporary MS-DOS. MS-DOS 5 caught up nearly two years later, then DR-DOS 6 came out leaving MS-DOS another year to catch up with MS-DOS 6.x.

      Actually through the late 70s and 80s I was using DRI's MP/M (1978) and Concurrent-CP/M-86 (1981). These were multi-tasking and multiuser when MS-DOS couldn't even use a hard disk (MS-DOS 1).

      MS-DOS was so poor that most successful software bypassed it for video output, writing to the BIOS or directly to the video card memory.

      The command line was awful with no command history or line editing when most other systems had these built in. At least there were some add=ons that helped. Even when MS at last ventured a command line editing tool with Windows 98 it wasn't installed but was hidden away and wasn't even mentioned in the manual. In truth MS _wanted_ everything DOS to be awful so they could claim how much 'easier' Windows was.

    7. Re:MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      MS-DOS was so poor that most successful software bypassed it for video output, writing to the BIOS or directly to the video card memory.

      I think you're confusing DOS with PC BIOS here. DOS never had any APIs for video output, except for some very primitive text manipulation (INT 21h services 09h and 0Ah - which are effectively puts() and gets(), respectively).

      There was INT 10h, which let you switch video modes (both text and graphics), print text (which worked in graphic modes), and get/set pixels. Now that was indeed slow - most people used it for convenient mode switching, but then blitted directly to video memory. But INT 10h came from BIOS, and was there as soon as you booted - it had nothing to do with DOS.

      The command line was awful with no command history or line editing when most other systems had these built in. At least there were some add=ons that helped. Even when MS at last ventured a command line editing tool with Windows 98 i

      Actually, there was DOSKEY that would enable editing and history, and that came long before Win98 (I think in MS-DOS 5.0?). For some reason, few people knew of its existence, though.

    8. Re:MS-DOS wasn't _so_ bad by BlueScreenO'Life · · Score: 1

      It wasn't so bad because it was so simple. It didn't try to do anything slightly advanced, such as basic multi-tasking or memory protection.

      Several programs could run at the same time, but that relied on each program not stepping on any others' toes, no protection from the OS granted, so things could go badly wrong.

  61. History? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:History? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You make a good point about not looking at the full picture, yet call Windows a "tiny offshoot of computing". That shows almost as much as ignorance -- and I say this as someone who hasn't really used Windows in 8 years -- Windows has had a massive effect on the history of computing, whether we like it or not.

    2. Re:History? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      What about mini computers, mainframes, Smalltalk-80, Multics, Unix System III

      I have an Altos 586 system in my collection. It's an 8086 based machine with 512 of RAM. The '5' in the model name refers to the fact that it has 5 serial ports so that five users can be using the system simultaneously with dumb terminals. Your mention of Unix System III reminded me of it. It runs Microsoft Xenix, the early version that was based on Unix System III.

      Yes, back in the early 80's Microsoft was a licensed UNIX vendor. And they had the best port of the UNIX code for the 8086 architecture.

  62. I have 128K Mac tapes by methano · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:I have 128K Mac tapes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I wonder what they're worth.

      A bucket of warm spit.

    2. Re:I have 128K Mac tapes by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1

      Hmm, interesting. I was just about to say "BS" because the 128K (my first Mac, too) had a floppy drive ... but it's true that we also had some instructional audio tapes. My, those were horrible, though. :-)

  63. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm twelve and what is this?

  64. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by FlyingGuy · · Score: 1

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

    --
    Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
  65. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by ProppaT · · Score: 2

    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.

    --
    Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
  66. Re:Why the hell is this here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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".

  67. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by PNutts · · Score: 1

    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.

  68. Re:Ummm Why not just do it in DosBox? by BatGnat · · Score: 1

    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.

  69. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by RL78 · · Score: 1

    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?

  70. Dosbox by binkzz · · Score: 1

    You'll have more luck running Windows 1.0 on DOSbox.

    --
    'For we walk by faith, not by sight.' II Corinthians 5:7
  71. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Developers! Developers! Developers!
    ~ Crunch! ~
    Brains! Brains! Brains!

  72. MS DOS 6.0 Dos Shell! by Paracelcus · · Score: 1

    Think of it a MS Windblows 0.90! Actually it was fun to use, I liked it!

    --
    I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
    1. Re:MS DOS 6.0 Dos Shell! by bedouin · · Score: 1

      You beat me to it.

      Tandy's Deskmate was more useful than Windows at that time -- and that wasn't a very significant feat.

  73. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

    and what about skype

  74. Word 1.0 is much harder to get working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was copy protected and the floppies they used go bad.

  75. any know how to get system 6 running in softmac or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    any know how to get system 6 running in softmac or Basilisk II in mac II or better mode?

  76. Notepad and Paint survived... by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

    calculator, clock, calendar, notepad, print spooler, paint program, a primitive word processor and, of course, Reversi [...] Although Windows applications have evolved and expanded in the past quarter-century, Notepad and Paint survived all the way up to Windows 7.

    I'm not sure whether he forgot to say Calc survived, or if he meant "survived unchanged" and deliberately left Calc out since it got a major revision in Windows 7.

    If it's the latter case, he really shouldn't have included Paint either since that also got a major revision in Windows 7.

    1. Re:Notepad and Paint survived... by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      I believe Notepad and Paint have had some minor revisions as well, even before Win 7.

      Paint, at the very least, added the ability to load and save new image formats (and might have dumped old formats no one uses anymore?). Over the years they added JPEG and PNG.

      I will say though, that calc has definitely gotten more love over the years, and especially with Win7.

    2. Re:Notepad and Paint survived... by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      I don't think Notepad has changed much, if at all. I knew that Paint added the extra formats, but I'm not sure if I'd really call that a revision since most likely they just linked in a couple more libraries to import/export the new formats. The revision with Windows 7, on the other hand, was much more substantial. And to be honest I think I preferred the version of Calc that came with XP.

  77. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by newcastlejon · · Score: 2

    No, but it doesn't make it more valid either.

    What it does do is alienate your intended audience and make them think you're like chlorine in /.'s gene pool.

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
  78. First Machintosh OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fist mac os is an elusive animal, mostly because the first classic Mac had most of the GUI functions in ROM memory in an API ROM library called Quick Draw, so you need to emulate that hardwired routines too

  79. Remove an appointment by tepples · · Score: 1

    What if you need to cancel your appointment?

    Remove/Cancel. Remove would cancel the appointment.

    1. Re:Remove an appointment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I don't want to remove the appointment from my calendar, I want to cancel it so that no one shows up at all.

    2. Re:Remove an appointment by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      No, "Remove" would remove the dialogue box, terminating the 'cancel appointment' request.

      Really, though, it should all just be up to that little box with the 'X' in the upper right corner.

  80. MacOS 1 not going to be easy by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

    The first Macs were very hardware dependent. With only 128K RAM to work with, a lot of the OS was in ROM (and remained there throughout much of the MacOS 1-7 evolution). Not sure of the copyright on that, whether Apple would allow such a ROM dump. With so little RAM/ROM I'm sure there were a lot of techniques to save bytes, some that undoubtedly made the code very hardware dependent, and therefore harder to emulate. Also, they were Motorola 68000 machines, not Intel.

    Any emulation of it would have to overcome quite a few barriers. Not that it's impossible, just a much higher barrier to entry than Windows 1 was.

    1. Re:MacOS 1 not going to be easy by ecotax · · Score: 1

      You're right about the ROM, and yes, the copyright is a legal issue. But AFAIK it's legal to make a ROM dump of an old Mac you own and use that yourself. Also, although technically not legal, I doubt anyone at Apple would care if you would use a ROM file obtained otherwise, given how long MacOS X is deprecated now.
      The vMac website I mentioned in my earlier post also has a download link for a tool to create a ROM dump.

      --
      "Money is a sign of poverty." - Iain Banks
  81. secret about box by femtobyte · · Score: 1

    If you get an early Mac OS, remember to check out the "secret about box" easter-egg

    1. Re:secret about box by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1

      And I'll never forget the G 49D81A interrupt on the Mac SE, with those scanned-in(!) photos of the developers. So neat!

  82. Re:Why the hell is this here? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    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?

    If you were a master in the art of using the question mark, you would be more wise and less assy.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  83. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Nikker · · Score: 1

    It's called Google do you use it?

    --
    A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
  84. Macintosh OS? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    No, to make a fair comparison we'd have to go back to Apple II days. But then again Apple fanboys always keep forgetting the details.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Macintosh OS? by ecotax · · Score: 1

      No, to make a fair comparison we'd have to go back to Apple II days. But then again Apple fanboys always keep forgetting the details.

      Comparing Windows 1.0 to the Apple II would hardly be fair to Windows. The Apple II had a pretty mature OS at that time.
      Furhtermore, straight from Wikipedia:

      Windows 1.0 is a 16-bit graphical operating environment that was released on 20 November 1985

      On January 24, 1984, Apple Computer Inc. (now Apple Inc.) introduced the Macintosh personal computer, with the Macintosh 128K model, which came bundled with what was later renamed the Mac OS, but then known simply as the System Software.

      When your fairness criterium is the release date, you'd have to compare Window 1.0 with MacOS 2. Which is a sure way of becoming an Apple fanboy.

      --
      "Money is a sign of poverty." - Iain Banks
    2. Re:Macintosh OS? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Not really. The original MacOS had about the same number of crippled and limited applets as the original Windows. Neither had many third party apps for quite awhile.

  85. Correction by ecotax · · Score: 1

    I don't have version 1.0, but I do have version 1.1.

    Admittedly weird to reply on my own post, but I just checked: I have a System 1.0 / Finder 1.1g version of MacOS running under vMac.
    It appears to run just fine under the latest version of MacOS X.

    --
    "Money is a sign of poverty." - Iain Banks
  86. TopView, DESQview, Gem, VisiOn, Lisa... by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    You really need to put this context. Windows 1.0 came out in 1985 with non-overlapping windows. Very odd, since to anyone who was paying attention then, the very word "Windows" mean the overlapping windows developed at Xerox PARC and embodied in machines like the Alto, the Star, the Three Rivers PERQ, etc. To have a system called "Windows" without overlapping windows is missing the point on a grand scale.

    IBM's TopView was a multitasking, "character-mode GUI" version of DOS that came out in 1984. DESQview not only beat Windows 1.0, it actually survived and enjoyed a modest success in the following years. I do not remember whether they had overlapping windows or not.

    GEM, a genuine full-fledged, GUI with overlapping windows, shipped in 1985 for the 8086. I don't remember it having much success as an OS or user environment, but there was one faintly successful product--was it a desktop publishing program? that actually incorporated GEM as an integral part of the program.

    Of course, the Lisa shipped in 1983.

    And there was one more, darn it, what was it? Was it from the VisiCalc people? Yes, VisiOn shipped in late 1983, and it, too, was a full-fledged GUI with overlapping windows.

    1. Re:TopView, DESQview, Gem, VisiOn, Lisa... by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

      GEM, a genuine full-fledged, GUI with overlapping windows, shipped in 1985 for the 8086. I don't remember it having much success as an OS or user environment, but there was one faintly successful product--was it a desktop publishing program? that actually incorporated GEM as an integral part of the program.

      I think you're thinking of Ventura Publisher. There may have been some other programs that shipped with a GEM runtime. It wasn't actually that odd at the time. A usable CAD program called In-A-Vision shipped with the Windows 1 runtime. You could also run it under Windows 2 and Windows 3 (real mode only). And, of course, the original AOL clients shipped with the GEOS runtime.

    2. Re:TopView, DESQview, Gem, VisiOn, Lisa... by yelvington · · Score: 1

      GEM was picked up by Atari for its Motorola 68000-based system, which ran a rewrite of CP/M called GEMdos. Early versions were disk-based but it was quickly moved into ROM. It primarily competed with the Commodore Amiga (which was much more sophisticated), also launched in 1985, for the home market. I think I paid $800 for my Atari 520ST. PCs, including the Amstrad, were much more expensive back then.

      Very little commercial software was developed for the platform.

      GEM implemented a cooperative multitasking model but as I recall, you could only run one full-fledged GEM application. Multiple "desk accessories" could run simultaneously.

  87. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  88. Forgot the most important part of Windows 1. by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

    Windows 1 would multi-task DOS applications. It would give up a time slice for each DOS call. There were dummy calls to give up a slice without doing I/O. I used to run compile or run C-ROBOTS in the background on an 800x600 super-EGA display. Of course Windows 2 killed that. Was overlapping windows a big enough deal that we had to give up DOS in a Window?

    1. Re:Forgot the most important part of Windows 1. by dunng808 · · Score: 1

      I walked Windows 1.4 on my IBM Portable, 8088, 512KB RAM, monochrom CGI screen. Logitech three button serial port mouse. I did write "ran" but it felt dishonest.

      I remember MS sales material -- Byte magazine ads? -- that extolled the virtues of tiled windows. Seems they believed users would find overlapping windows confusing. Then 2.0 came out with overlapping windows and all was forgotten.

      I remember how an Apple Lisa salesman had to preset the spreadsheet and word processor windows because they took so long to open. Didn't want the prospective buyer to see that.

      Recall how amazed you were the first time you saw X on a hi-res monitor? I could read mail and edit a paper at the same time, side by side, and still have room for a cool analog clock. Windows 3.x looked like a kiddie toy.

      --

      Gary Dunn
      Open Slate Project

  89. My dog ate it. by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    I wanted to see my first dead bird but my dog ate it. Fortunately, he threw it back up. I would post the pictures, but unlike jbrodkin, I don't believe in posting pictures of things that are ugly and broken.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    1. Re:My dog ate it. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      unlike jbrodkin, I don't believe in posting pictures of things that are ugly and broken.

      I have Yggdrasil's Fall 1993 'Plug and Play Linux,' the first version, speaking of ugly and broken. They initially tried branding it as 'LGX' and I suspect they thought they would establish that proprietary name and own the thing.

      It did a few things okay and would boot up directly from the CD, but the hard disk installer was quite ugly and broken. You could only install the whole fricking thing in one piece, even though there were supposed to be installer options to just install the parts you wanted. No matter what you picked, it'd install everything It'd crash in the middle after it filled up the entire disk. The whole thing meant about 600 megabytes. Nobody had 600 megabytes on a single disk back then. At least I sure didn't.

      It played music at the login prompt on first boot, though, which was quite impressive for the time. Sound card support was rather pitiful in Linux back in 1993.

    2. Re:My dog ate it. by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      ouch! 93 was when slackware 1.0 was out. i didn't get my hands on it until 94 but i fell in love immediately. it was on a cd with a bunch of freeware and open source projects. getting cd drivers cranked up on my machine after the install was the only thing difficult. docs on the cd were seriously complete. even x had a step by step. sound and matrox card were simple insmod to get going. anyway, i have to say Patrick Volkerding new what he was doing long before anyone else did. it had an "install everything" option too. like most people i knew, and apparently you too, getting hold of a drive larger than 200M was not in the budget. it is amazing how much was available for linux in 94! apache was even on the cd but i couldn't get it to compile :(

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  90. Re:Why the hell is this here? by dingen · · Score: 1

    Windows 95 isn't an OS either, it's still just a shell around DOS. Windows NT, now that's an OS.

    --
    Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
  91. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Simon80 · · Score: 1

    I didn't mention it both because we haven't seen any fallout yet, and because any self-respecting Linux or FOSS user will already be using a SIP client or some other free alternative. I've been getting all of my landline phone service for the last four years through an SPA-3102, which I'm soon going to replace with a Mesh Potato (which runs Asterisk/OpenWRT).

  92. My OS2-Warp disks by equex · · Score: 1

    I wonder if my original two-set OS2-Warp disks will still work in some VM?

    --
    Can I light a sig ?
    1. Re:My OS2-Warp disks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if my original two-set OS2-Warp disks will still work in some VM?

      I would like to play around with those disks. @markyb86

      never could find the disk images anywhere.

    2. Re:My OS2-Warp disks by equex · · Score: 1

      Yo i dont use that twitter shit but give me your username and I will get back to you. I have to find the disks and make images if they are even working anymore :)

      --
      Can I light a sig ?
  93. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Shills are bad enough. Whining shills are just pure lose. Billy Boy Goats - errrr - GATES left a legacy that will be memorialized in the history books. And, that legacy includes the borg icon. Don't like it? Don't read Microsloth articles on Slashdot - problem solved.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  94. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not when its something I give 0 fucks about.

  95. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Speak for yourself, young kook! I'm as relevant as I - - - now, dammit, what were we arguing about?

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  96. Some older Apple OSes by mattack2 · · Score: 1

    OK, it only goes back to 6.0.3 for the Mac (but also has some newer ones), and has Apple IIGS and other downloads.. but some of the "newer old" Apple System Software is available at: http://support.apple.com/kb/TA48312

  97. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'd love to see Gates demonstrating Ballmer's ability to perform "Puttin' on the Ritz" to a skeptical theatre audience.

    --
    (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
  98. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by exomondo · · Score: 1

    I could go for a Ballmer Zombie instead.

    or a chair

  99. QEMU by bloosh · · Score: 1

    This isn't really that difficult.

    Here's a screenshot I just made of DOS 3.3 / Windows 1.01 running under QEMU under Ubuntu 11.04.

    http://i.imgur.com/lrEf3.png

    It may even run under DOSBox, but I've not tried anything earlier than WFW 3.11 in that environment.

    I was rather impressed with myself recently getting this running:

    Ubuntu 11.04 > VirtualBox 4.0.something > OS/2 Warp4 FP15 > WinOS/2.

    That was a challenge!

  100. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by _4rp4n3t · · Score: 1

    Meta-bias.

  101. Windows 1.03 SDK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a copy of Windows 1.03 SDK floating on the net. Does anyone have tried it (require Microsoft C 4.0, MASM 5.1)?

  102. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

    "Meta-satire?" Really?

    I say never attribute to satire that which can be explained by sheer laziness.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  103. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by smash · · Score: 1

    Or just a chair in flight

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  104. Re:Why the hell is this here? by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 1

    There are still some guys around that remember things like Arcnet, RLL drives and ISA bus. Using a paper hole puncher to affect storage capacity. Aww yeah.

    --

    Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

  105. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by darkpixel2k · · Score: 1

    I could go for a Ballmer Zombie instead.

    Ballmer-monkey. (Developers!)

    --
    There's no place like ::1 (I've completed my transition to IPv6)
  106. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Meh, I still think my idea for an icon is better. picture the iconic Ballmer with his tongue stuck out, wearing an "I heart Apple!" beanie. Considering his "me too!" aping of Apple since he took the helm it would be a perfect fit. I can just imagine him rallying the troops: "And with this new version we'll take the market by storm and be as hip and cool as Apple! yes we will! We really really will! STOP LAUGHING AT ME!!!"

    As for TFA...emmm...okay? As someone who started with windows 3 frankly I'm glad those days are gone. TSAs, memory corruption, constant reboots, frankly all the OSes of that period were shit. The fact that with those early machines they were able to squeeze so much into an OS that was that primitive, no memory protection and everything having bare metal access, was a miracle. i think I'll just stay with my nice quad with 8Gb of RAM and Windows 7, where the only time I have to deal with a reboot is when I want to run my really old copy of Cubase in XP. Frankly those days? nothing really "good" about them computing wise IMHO. Might as well be trying to build a punch card reader and hook up some core memory to your Arduino, more interesting that running really old crap OSes.

    It would be interesting though to see Linux 1.0, Windows 1.0, and the first MacOS side by side running in VMs, just to see which shits itself and dies first. Most would probably say win 1.0 but I bet it would be the Linux, as the driver support really wasn't there that early in the game.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  107. Re:Why the hell is this here? by justsomebody · · Score: 1

    nah, topic is just titled wrong. should be "Worlds unemployment in critical levels. People going mad from running out of all useless things to do in their spare unemployed time"

    --
    Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
  108. Some of you may not be aware... by BitwizeGHC · · Score: 1

    ... that there was an 80186 processor -- Intel's first 16-bit x86 offering. It was popular in embedded applications, but a few workstations based on it were made -- one of them being the Tandy Model 2000, a not-quite-IBM-compatible, MS-DOS-based PC which you could buy at Radio Shack. I owned a second-hand one of these, and even learned how to write assembly on it.

    What I didn't learn until recently was that there was a version of Windows for this curious beast, and indeed the 2000 played an integral role in the development of Windows. Unlike its IBM cousins, the 2000 was offered with a high-res, 640x480 color graphics card as a standard option, and Microsoft was interested in implementing a full-color display for Windows. So, Microsoft developed the initial versions of color Windows on the 2000, and Bill Gates touted that fact in celebrity endorsements for Tandy ads.

    The much more modular driver architecture of Windows -- a revolution in PC software at the time -- enabled it to be smoothly ported to the Tandy 2000 irrespective of the hardware incompatibilities that made it not a true PC compatible.

    --
    N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
  109. think i'll make an article also by Nyder · · Score: 1

    I have a working TRS-80 Mod 4 portable. Guess I should video tape it running, make a blog, and then post it to slashdot.

    At least that OS would be running on original hardware.

    Anyone can use an emulator...

    --
    Be seeing you...
    1. Re:think i'll make an article also by Nyder · · Score: 1

      I have a working TRS-80 Mod 4 portable. Guess I should video tape it running, make a blog, and then post it to slashdot.

      At least that OS would be running on original hardware.

      Anyone can use an emulator...

      yes, i said video tape. When you go old school, you go all the way.

      Wait, maybe i should bust out Super 8 film instead...

      --
      Be seeing you...
  110. Ah... those were the days... by rnturn · · Score: 1

    I still have fond memories of the time I loaded Windows 1.0 on a Zenith PC that someone at work wasn't using any more. Once the installation floppies had all been loaded, I called in my boss and we laughed and laughed. I still recall how much my sides hurt from all that laughing.

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  111. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by OpenLegs · · Score: 1

    Yeah he looks more like Prosthetnic Vogon Jeltz to me... Acts like it too. And his "Developers!" rant sure fits the mold on Vogon Poetry.

  112. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod parent up

  113. Xerox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should also see if you can get the origin of the GUI OS' from xerox. I've never seen it but I'd love to see a review of it!

  114. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

    Well, he certainly did work at MS when Windows 1.0 was written, which is what this story is about... So perhaps the icon is actually appropriate?

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  115. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

    How about an animated GIF of the monkey dance?

  116. Remember SideKick for DOS by Dr.Ruud · · Score: 1

    https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/SideKick

    Was it print.com, that set all this in motion?

  117. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Meta-troll

  118. Ballmer Windows 1.0 Sales Pitch by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1
  119. Mac OS by inglorion_on_the_net · · Score: 1

    Anyone have a copy of the first Macintosh OS they want to send me?

    You could try contacting Apple. I know they offer versions of System 7 for download; perhaps they will also provide the original if you ask. I think you will also need a compatible Macintosh ROM to be able to actually run it.

    Good luck, and have fun. I've always been impressed with what these programmers of yore managed to accomplish. Imagine, an operating system with a GUI, and applications for image processing and word processing, in 128KB of RAM!

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  120. Re:Why the hell is this here? by drsmithy · · Score: 1

    Windows technically wasn't an OS until Win 95 [...]

    Please define what an "OS" is.

  121. .ovl file by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did noone except me notice that he tried to open/execute an .ovl file, which of course won't work and then argues that Windows is not working well because of the VM?

  122. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Askmum · · Score: 1

    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.

    I agree. Get a Steve Ballmer as Davy Jones icon. Sheesh, you guys. Live in the present.

  123. Well, the article started off well... by Tomsk70 · · Score: 1

    But this - htthttp://imgur.com/MCxRw - meant that I only got as far as the first page.

    Advertising means nothing if your viewers won't come back.

  124. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about an animated...

    NO!

    GIF of the monkey dance?

    An image of the Ballmer monkey would be fine as long as it isn't animated.

  125. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by scubamage · · Score: 1

    Perhaps this image of an old man trying to be cool would work? http://i692.photobucket.com/albums/vv282/videogabe/cool_old_man.jpg

  126. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone under 25 wouldn't know what the Borg are?

    I am 40 and I do not know what Borg are. Hint, I do not live in the USA. Always thought those weird graphics might have had something to do with Darth Vader and the Evil Empire.

  127. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is SPARTA!

  128. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by sincewhen · · Score: 1

    I think "Uncle Fester".

    --
    -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
  129. I knew it would happen! by Combatso · · Score: 1

    This is the year of Windows on the Desktop!

  130. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    Anyone under 25 would hardly get the references.

    There are people under the age of 35 here?

    Get.

    Off.

    My.

    Lawn.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  131. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Pigskin-Referee · · Score: 1

    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.

    Yes

    --
    Pigskin-Referee
    Linux: Yesterday's technology, tomorrow ...
  132. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For whom? The million or so Windows Phone 7 fans out there, or the three remaining Nokia fans?

  133. Amiga 1000 kicked ass by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    back in the 85-90 days, the amiga kicked ass in all regards.

    Looked sexy, ran fast, had lots of ram, its a pitty it didnt get 10x the R&D budget+programmers tho.

    Even amiga monitors were sweet looking.

    It was the ferrari of computers then.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  134. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by markhb · · Score: 1

    It's not laziness; they actually recreated the billg-as-borg icon during one of the redesigns. That's certainly not CmdrTaco's old GIMP image from the 90's.

    Have they done a retro-Slashdot (i.e., with the original UI) as an April Fools joke yet?

    --
    Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
  135. But what about the applications? by bjb · · Score: 1

    In the past I went through the effort of finding an old version of Windows 1.0, getting it running and playing with it for all of 20 minutes. Interesting to see what they had, what it did, etc. I still have a VM image somewhere with it in case I ever get bored again. However, what I failed to do at the time was find any software that was actually written for Windows 1.0 that didn't come as part of the installation. Searching the internet for 'software for windows 1.0' (or the variety of phrases I thought of) mostly came up with v1.0 releases of software for Windows; i.e. software that could have been for Windows 95 (say), and it was their v1.0 release. Unfortunately, I didn't come across any sites that had any of that old software. As well, I'm not even what was ever even written for Windows 1.0. Best I could tell, I've only heard that one or two applications were ever written for Windows 1.0, but I can't find the binaries on the internet. Though, I believe you could run Windows 2.0 sofware on 1.0 and vice-versa, at least to some extent. In Windows 3.0 they apparently changed things up enough to require rewrites. Anyone ever find anything?

    --
    Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
  136. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Besides, if they updated the icon, the new one would probably just be "M$" in stylized text.

  137. Re:Isn't It Past Time Slashdot Change the MS Icon? by robsku · · Score: 1

    The fact that with those early machines they were able to squeeze so much into an OS that was that primitive, no memory protection and everything having bare metal access, was a miracle.

    I would not say so, there were others doing better already then - not everyone of them on PC hardware though but equivalent.

    --
    In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
  138. Different program... by robsku · · Score: 1

    Different program... but same purpose. I would guess that the "write.exe proxy to wordpad" is for compatibility as I remember some Win3.x programs launching write to show documentation... Just a guess though but I dont know any other reasonable explanation.

    --
    In capitalist USA corporations control the government.