Ohm Machre Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 I can see all that, Foamy.My mother recently got a Windows 8 laptop, and - let me just say - Ohm not amused. x3I'm just not a big fan of the design overall. The "boot to start", I could get over if it just didn't..... LOOK the way it does.It makes me feel like it's trying to be flashier than it needs to be, heh.So, while it's great, I must say that I am going to stick with Windows 7, which, for multiple reasons that I know of, is proven to work for games better than 8 is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotmailcompany52 Posted April 23, 2013 Author Share Posted April 23, 2013 Guys, lets keep this on topic. So if you want to discuss windows 8 go make a thread for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROFLCopter64bit Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 So... Have you made a virtual machiene for it yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotmailcompany52 Posted April 23, 2013 Author Share Posted April 23, 2013 So... Have you made a virtual machiene for it yet?Not yet, i still need to get the stuff from then 7 floppys onto something i can use, like a memory stick or a cd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotmailcompany52 Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 So, how shall i transfer my windows 3 stuff to a cd and how do i then install it to a bootcamp partition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3_bit Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 I have a Aptima from the 70's. I have 16 MB of Ram and 2 MB G-RAM on this rig. Only 2 minute boot time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROFLCopter64bit Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 So, how shall i transfer my windows 3 stuff to a cd and how do i then install it to a bootcamp partition?http://www.magiciso.com/FAQ/FAQ0005.htmThat should show you how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatBum Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 You can make disk images of the floppies and use them in a VM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROFLCopter64bit Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 You can make disk images of the floppies and use them in a VM.But if you store them on a CD first you don't need a computer from 2001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amram Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Its almost hilarious how fast much older OSes tend to load on modern hardware. I never tried 3.1 since 95 came out, but back arounr the days of xp sp1 i did try win95. A wimpy little 64 mb install, lol. Booted quick, did most thngs really quick. I think 3.1 will seem to be shockingly fast to boot and responsive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotmailcompany52 Posted April 25, 2013 Author Share Posted April 25, 2013 Now time to find a computer with a floppy drive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROFLCopter64bit Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 If you can't find one, you can do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotmailcompany52 Posted April 25, 2013 Author Share Posted April 25, 2013 Pick up only D: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROFLCopter64bit Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Just google or ebay "floppy drive usb" and look for what you want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotmailcompany52 Posted April 25, 2013 Author Share Posted April 25, 2013 Hmm, maybe i ask the I.T. guys weiher i can use a comp with floppy drive to put it onto my 8GB memory stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion13622 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I really don't remember anyone in the industry referring to Windows NT as Windows 4. It might have been labelled internally as 4.x, but for almost everyone, it was Windows NT, and it actually came after Windows 95.I also had the extreme displeasure of owning Windows Me, which was probably the worst version of Windows ever.Actually, most people don't know this, but Windows NT had 2 versions. 4.x was the most commonly known, but it had a previous version, 3.51. Again, had Workstation and Server editions, but Workstation was the most common. Many people preferred to use NT 4 workstation rather than 3.11 for Workgroups. When Windows NOT-ME was released (I hear all you laughing, and you all know why...lol) Windows 2000 came out. Truth be told, 2000 Professional, Server, Advanced Server, and Datacenter Server all came out, then ME was released, due to the general public crying like little kids because their last release was 98SE (which had a major bug to begin with after it's RTM, of which they sent a seperate CD or had you download the fix). Yes sir, good times...I can remember all the way back to DOS 2.1, and DeskView with QEMM386 as your memory manager. - - - Updated - - -2 worst mistakes Microsoft admittedly made were Windows ME and Windows Vista. 7 is what Vista was supposed to be, in the sense of stability and operating. It ranks right up there with the many years of stability XP Professional Edition gave not only the people at home, but the Enterprise Businesses as well, and today 90% of the Business Enterprise is still running XP. Costs to do the upgrade are far more expensive than leaving well enough alone.- - - Updated - - -Its almost hilarious how fast much older OSes tend to load on modern hardware. I never tried 3.1 since 95 came out, but back arounr the days of xp sp1 i did try win95. A wimpy little 64 mb install, lol. Booted quick, did most thngs really quick. I think 3.1 will seem to be shockingly fast to boot and responsive.That's because Windows 3.11 was not a true operating system, it required MS-DOS and it was mearly a shell that sat on top of DOS. Much in the same respect as Linux operates. Its real look is that of a command prompt driven system, but you can get many different desktop environments that interface with it as a shell. Ubuntu happens to be just one in a couple hundred. KDE, GNOME, are more other common ones... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basic.syntax Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I run win 8.1 now, works very smoothly. The "start screen" is a bit much (its... a full screen thing) but I don't spend all that much time looking at it. It's a program launcher, that happens to support dynamic icons/tiles. And it reminds me... of Windows 3.x. Because the app launcher screen has (unwalled) panes, in which you can re-arrange icons on a grid, just like you could inside Win 3.x Program Manager windows.Microsoft did a lot of user research, which told them people had trouble finding what they wanted in the Win3.x Program Manager messes of icons, and from that created a hierarchical, cascading start menu that packed more programs into a small but organized launcher space. Nonetheless, going from 3.x to Win9x, some people didn't like Microsoft forcing an organization scheme on them.Win8 seemed to throw that Win9x research out, going back to a Program Manager type of solution. Improvements over Win 3.x include the ability to just type at any time, and the launcher searches / filters apps by name, based on what you have typed. And you don't need to set up sub-windows to categorize different programs, just drag and drop into groupings as you like, the start screen will stretch and scroll to hold whatever number of things you care to link on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fel Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Microsoft did a lot of user research, which told them people had trouble finding what they wanted in the Win3.x Program Manager messes of icons, and from that created a hierarchical, cascading start menu that packed more programs into a small but organized launcher space. Nonetheless, going from 3.x to Win9x, some people didn't like Microsoft forcing an organization scheme on them.And instead of learning how to use it... they let programs manage themselves.Stuff like adobe reader (or ANY of its derivatives) doesn't need an icon anywhere; it automatically loads when needed by opening a document; other things create folders just to put pointless links in them. Why people can't spend 5 min cleaning up their start menu, I don't know... instead we get the trash standards from freedesktop.org, and we get the worse windows 7 version of the startmenu which is horrible if you want to use it like a start menu but good if you just search for things (a.k.a. slower).Windows 8, of course elects for the "cool" factor of having unorganized "apps" that you page through... just like an un-smartphone.Lowest common denominator... those are the people who current desktop environments target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cicatrix Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I have MS DOS 6.22 on Virtual Machine. Also there is DosBox. Sometimes I play *VERY OLD* games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
windows_x_seven Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Try installing the system and then installing some recent games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel l. Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 buy an old pc and install it you lucky ducky! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethanadams Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 http://www.windows93.net/heres a windows 93 emulator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camacha Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 2 worst mistakes Microsoft admittedly made were Windows ME and Windows Vista. 7 is what Vista was supposed to be, in the sense of stability and operating. It ranks right up there with the many years of stability XP Professional Edition gave not only the people at home, but the Enterprise Businesses as well, and today 90% of the Business Enterprise is still running XP. Costs to do the upgrade are far more expensive than leaving well enough alone.Vista was not a mistake. Vista was a major overhaul under the hood, which created the basis for not only Vista, but also 7 and 8. You can simply not expect a company to tweak a pretty much all new OS to perfection the first time around. It had some shortcomings and weaknesses, but was not a bad OS in the same sense some other OSs have been bad.XP is dead because it does not update any more. Though many businesses still use it, it has become a serious security risk. It is just asking for financial or customer data being stolen, so seeing that a company is still using XP is a major red flag that they do not care or know how to reasonably secure their IT works. It would probably be wise to stay away from those companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
windows_x_seven Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 My name and this thread are so ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javster Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 I'm a small baby compared to you lot, the earliest I remember was Windows 98! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts