Author Topic: Microsoft Windows! (Read 1312 times)

Calum · « **on:** 1 September 2003, 19:19 »

yes, you read correctly, i said microsoft windows, and this is the alternate OSs section!

this is just a little note to mention that i am going to try and install a custom version of mswindows, using this page as a jump off point:
http://www.gaby.de/win3x/esoft.htm

Basically, i want to have FreeDOS as the (open source) operating system, run windows (3.11 for workgroups) over the top, with some GNU apps for DOS, and have Calmira (open source) provide the actual GUI!

I will be interested in what sort of non-MS networking and so on i an come up with too. i already have a netscape and mosaic to run on there, plus an old winamp 1.x and so forth.

just letting you know. it amuses me to think of mswindows sandwiched between two bits of open source software. the trouble will be getting it all to work together using only configuration (i cannot code, as i am duff).

Faust · « **Reply #1 on:** 2 September 2003, 11:13 »

No offense but you are one sick man Calum.

suselinux · « **Reply #2 on:** 2 September 2003, 11:33 »

quote:
Originally posted by Calum:
yes, you read correctly, i said microsoft windows, and this is the alternate OSs section!

this is just a little note to mention that i am going to try and install a custom version of mswindows, using this page as a jump off point:
http://www.gaby.de/win3x/esoft.htm

Basically, i want to have FreeDOS as the (open source) operating system, run windows (3.11 for workgroups) over the top, with some GNU apps for DOS, and have Calmira (open source) provide the actual GUI!

I will be interested in what sort of non-MS networking and so on i an come up with too. i already have a netscape and mosaic to run on there, plus an old winamp 1.x and so forth.

just letting you know. it amuses me to think of mswindows sandwiched between two bits of open source software. the trouble will be getting it all to work together using only configuration (i cannot code, as i am duff).

DR. Calum Frankenstien

It all sounds very intersting to me, but please don't post any screens. I want to wait until the final version is out before I see LongHorn

HAHA

I kinda wonder why MS dosen't release the source code for windows 3x, they aren't going to make any more money from it.

Did, or does OS/2 run on a DOS back end

Calum, I have to ask what was your inspiration?

hm_murdock · « **Reply #3 on:** 2 September 2003, 15:18 »

OS/2 is the back-end. it's not graphical in of itself. like Windows 9x, OS/2 runs a GUI shell over a text-based OS. However, unlike 9x, the OS below is 32-bit protected mode and is stable, fast, and supports all the cool shit

Calum · « **Reply #4 on:** 2 September 2003, 20:21 »

also OS/2 supports MSDOS and windows 3.11 binaries also, but there are four reasons OS/2 never caught on:

1) direct competition with microsoft windows
2) everybody says OS/2 is really a bitch to administrate
3) OS/2 is stupidly expensive
4) slow moving sales, crap marketing, no compelling app, no reason to buy or switch to it.

back to "the project", no inspiration, i just read a lot of these people going on about how they want to remove pbrush, windows mediocre player and internet exploder from their computers, or use a shell other than explorer, but for some reason they want to keep windows. well i have dabbled in all that in the past, with limited success, and linux really answers all those issues better than any windows customisation could, but the fact is there are a lot of things come out since 1995, to enhance win3.11 and i thought well, older ms stuff will probably be less noncustomisable, plus why not try to kludge together as much of this as possible to come up with a working OS, with as much of it open source as possible...

i'm not saying it'll even work in the slightest, i suspect i will be waiting on FreeDOS to make a windows compatible version to be honest, and i could never get Desqview (the closed source port of X for MSDOS) to work*, but this might be something to do with it's activation code, and the fact that you can now legally use it, but you have to get an illegal seeming activation code, plus you have to download and create all the disks yourself. i may have done it all wrong, since there's little help and no support out there for it.

Anyway, i'm just interested in it. i'll have to look and see if there's a way i can install bash on a DOS system too, because the DOS CLI really sucks, although the FreeDOS crowd have *really* done a good job of adding the best bits of bash to their CLI.

* this was another ill fated competitor to MSwindows that was out about the same time as OS/2. the company that sold desqview wasn't as big as IBM, so they went bust.

Faust · « **Reply #5 on:** 2 September 2003, 21:31 »

quote:
I kinda wonder why MS dosen't release the source code for windows 3x, they aren't going to make any more money from it.

There are some evil deeds even Microsoft wont do? No that can't be right there's no depth they wont stoop to...

Aha! I know what it is! They've trained a team of ninja hypnotists to sneak into the homes of all the Free Software and Open Source developers and read out bits of the Windows 3.1 source code. Then they go and put bits of Windows 3.1 in the source for their apps and so everything starts crashing. When Gates see's all the GNU/Linux / BSD OS's crashing he knows that it's time to strike and reveals the Windows 3.1 code in the Linux kernel reviving his slain mutant henchman Darl McBride to start a massive legal war bigger than the original SCO affair!

And he'll get away with it too if it isn't for a team of "anti-ninja-hypnotist-rocket-launcher" equipped gnus, penguins and devils!

We must find all the gnus, penguins and devils we can and train them into an army of warriors! Muah ha ha ha!

Windows_SuX_@$$ · « **Reply #6 on:** 2 September 2003, 22:31 »

What kind of person wants Windows3.1 ?!?!?!

That windows is shit, yes in that one they dont spy on you because I dont think Internet was alaviable at that time. It comes with all shit shit like paint, calulater, SHIT SUX, and this screen willl explain what happens on everywindows and will never be fixed

http://www.gaby.de/win3x/screens/nov01.gif

Ideots that work for microsoft should realy work on the windows registry to make it more stable because it was always the same

mobrien_12 · « **Reply #7 on:** 3 September 2003, 00:27 »

quote:
Originally posted by suselinux:

I kinda wonder why MS dosen't release the source code for windows 3x, they aren't going to make any more money from it.

Thats not the Microsoft Way. Caldera used to do this when they were Caldera and not SCO.

Also, MS claimed they lost the source code. Caldera sued MS over the built in incompatibilities of windows with DRDOS. When the courts ordered MS to produce the source code.. your honor we can't find it anymore.

mobrien_12 · « **Reply #8 on:** 3 September 2003, 00:29 »

Calum, last I knew FreeDOS couldn't run Windows 3.1x. Has this changed??

Calum · « **Reply #9 on:** 3 September 2003, 01:12 »

quote:
Originally posted by Windows_SuX_@$$:
What kind of person wants Windows3.1 ?!?!?!

That windows is shit, yes in that one they dont spy on you because I dont think Internet was alaviable at that time.

AH AH! strike one!
the Internet has been around since the seventies, and its predecessors have been kicking about since the late sixties. Bill Gates did not however admit that the Internet was worth anything until 1995 when he realised that he had better make it worth something because mosaic was going to get the de facto standard for the world wide web if he didn't buy it out. earlier versions of windows 95 did not come with IE or so i have heard, it was available as an add on, kind of like a service pack (after gates bought the mosaic browser and renamed it to internet exploiter).
And while i agree that that windows is shit, i put it to you that it is the best mswindows ever released for many reasons, depending on your outlook. I reckon it crashes less, does its job properly, admits it's not an OS, merely a GUI. given networking sucks the ass off a thousand donkeys, but hey, that's microsoft. plus you can get it for ten quid off of ebay totally legally and with NO requirement to put in some activation code.

quote:
It comes with all shit shit like paint, calulater, SHIT SUX,

well, in windows 3.11 you can (if you want to remove mspaint) simply type "del c:\windows\pbrush.exe" and that's it done! there's no registry (a HUGE problem with later windowss in my opinion) and few dlls. a lot more of the OS is scripts (which are human readable and human editable) instead of meaningless jibberish designed to obfuscate all configuration to mere mortals.

quote:
and this screen willl explain what happens on everywindows and will never be fixed

http://www.gaby.de/win3x/screens/nov01.gif

um, i actually suspect (although i am not in any way betting on it) that that shot has been doctored. it says in the URL that it's windows 3x but look, it has a windows start menu and toolbar which was not included in windows until windows 95 (and was seen in RiscOS seven years earlier) and although there are a couple of programs to emulate this bar in win3.x, they don't look like that.
In my opinion that's windows NT 3.x attempting to run a 32 bit windows 95 program, is it not? in which case my windows for workgroups 3.11 will not be affected. thank your lucky stars it's not a blue screen of death.
I

quote:
deots that work for microsoft should realy work on the windows registry to make it more stable because it was always the same

i'm sorry but you cannot get away with using the words "windows registry" and "stable" inconjunction with each other. that is ridiculous. trying to fix the windows registry is like pissing into a hurricane*. each program should have its own configuration files and those should be kept in /etc and any files that need to be written to should be kept within a hidden directory within the user's home directory. eg program: amsn keeps config info within ~/.amsn et cetera. this works fine in linux, bsd, et cetera, and i have seen it at work in windows using open source programs such as gaim, mozilla firebird and filezilla. this is sensible because if one file gets corrupted then the rest are unnafected. and since /etc is read only to normal users, the chance of corruption is incredibly minimal. by contrast the registry is contained within only five files, all of which are open for read/write access by all users at all times! now that's fucking stupid!

finally the idea here is not to have windows 3.11 as such, it's to have FreeDOS running mswindows 3.11 as the network and bitmapping software with calmira as the GUI. basically i see the rols of mswindows as being similar to XFree86 in a normal linux distribution.

*pointless and stupid, in case you didn't get it

Calum · « **Reply #10 on:** 3 September 2003, 01:20 »

quote:
Originally posted by M. O'Brien:
Calum, last I knew FreeDOS couldn't run Windows 3.1x. Has this changed??

nope, as far as i know it still can't run windows 3.1x, but FreeDOS 0.9b now has a native CDROM driver, which is a big step forward in my opinion, plus back at 0.8b there were rumours that some people had indeed managed to get windows to run on there, although i don't know how.

I do have some exe file which claims to alter MSDOS7 and above so that windows 3.11 can run on it, eg: you get windows 95 or 98, remove the GUI bits and install windows 3.11 on it, but you get an incompatibility error, which this file claims to fix. so i am hoping that it can fix this issue with FreeDOS also, since this is the same error i see whn i try to install mswindows over FreeDOS (or did in 0.8b anyway)

oddly enough i couldn't get ANY GUI to work under FreeDOS, and i tried 3 or 4. no that's a lie, i did get one to load up but couldn't get the mouse to go. can't remember which one it was though.

bossesjoe · « **Reply #11 on:** 3 September 2003, 01:44 »

quote:
Originally posted by suselinux:

I kinda wonder why MS dosen't release the source code for windows 3x, they aren't going to make any more money from it.

Because most of it is the same as Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP, NT, and so on...

Calum · « **Reply #12 on:** 3 September 2003, 02:09 »

it can't be simply because the binaries for the whole of MSDOS 6.22 and windows for workgroups including the extra printer drivers fit onto eleven floppies. so most of it has to have been added later for windows 98, 2000, xp etc. i suspect that not much code has survived from windows' GUI days through to the 2000/XP releases to be honest since they would likely need to recompile even all the things they have left relatively the same, which would likely involve large rewrites for updated file formats and to implement new API to replace some of the deprecated API in mswindows 3.x. Sorry, i know that's boring, but i suspect it is true.

To be honest i think they are worried that if they release the code for windows 3.11, a team of hackers will get together and make some GPL version of windows which will threaten to take what part of the market has not already gone to the BSD/Linux mob.

can you imagine a GPL development model fueled mswindows, based on mswindows 3.11? before any of that registry stuff? all the mistakes in windows since about 1993 could be identified, avoided and generally better solutions could be made. bad code could be replaced and within a few years a monster open source windows could be competing with the 'real' thing. of course by this time the two windowss would not be all that intercompatible. there would be programs that ran on both of course, and all the open source programs (thunderbird, mozilla, openoffice.org) would have versions for both etc, but as you can see now, one would be free. and it would be more stable. and all the open source programs would run on it. and they would be free. and unlike linux it has two advantages:
1) it really is windows, so the sheep would not balk at using it
2) it really is windows, so an unspecified amount of windows software will actually run on it, as is. with no emulators.

that's why it will never happen.

mobrien_12 · « **Reply #13 on:** 3 September 2003, 03:03 »

quote:
Originally posted by Calum:

oddly enough i couldn't get ANY GUI to work under FreeDOS, and i tried 3 or 4. no that's a lie, i did get one to load up but couldn't get the mouse to go. can't remember which one it was though.

You can run win 3.11 it on DRDOS/OpenDOS, but its not perfect... and despite the free for personal use clause you might feel dirty using a product from the company that once was Caldera.

Anyway, you have to be really careful with the extended memory managers in Freedos when you try GUI's. There are 2 or 3 memory managers and they are mutually exclusive and from what I remember there were like only 1 or 2 that would work with Seal or GEM

You probably got GEM to work but needed to set the mouse driver to busmouse (that is the setting to use the DOS mouse drivers).

[ September 02, 2003: Message edited by: M. O'Brien ]

Windows_SuX_@$$ · « **Reply #14 on:** 3 September 2003, 11:45 »

Calum I mean they should Make it more stable, Wen I was messing around with alot of backdoors many of them [including the famous sub7{virus not Trojan prog}]edit your registry so when you start your windows box the virus runs so they can get in at any given time [ unless u got a firewall ] and after I deleted the viruses from my unorganized windows folder I noticed I had to edit my registry because when I restarted [ what u have to do to windows because its crap ] several messages apeard that this file can not be found so I had to edit my registry, windows should log one warning in a special registry edit folder and delete that from registry because many people dont know how to change the windows registry and it can be quite confusiong, the ideots at microsoft should organize it more 2, they say windows is the best and it won all these awards when its 200$ on plain shit also securitty sux, you can litteraly send someone a batch file to delete shit like rundll easily and fuck up their PC I dont know if you can do this on Linux I havent installed Mandrake yetm [im a noob to linux]

« previous next » Print Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Down Author Topic: Microsoft Windows! (Read 1312 times) Calum Global Moderator Posts: 7,812 Kudos: 1000 Microsoft Windows! « on: 1 September 2003, 19:19 » yes, you read correctly, i said microsoft windows, and this is the alternate OSs section! this is just a little note to mention that i am going to try and install a custom version of mswindows, using this page as a jump off point: http://www.gaby.de/win3x/esoft.htm Basically, i want to have FreeDOS as the (open source) operating system, run windows (3.11 for workgroups) over the top, with some GNU apps for DOS, and have Calmira (open source) provide the actual GUI! I will be interested in what sort of non-MS networking and so on i an come up with too. i already have a netscape and mosaic to run on there, plus an old winamp 1.x and so forth. just letting you know. it amuses me to think of mswindows sandwiched between two bits of open source software. the trouble will be getting it all to work together using only configuration (i cannot code, as i am duff). Logged visit these websites and make yourself happy forever: It's my music! \| My music on MySpace \| Integrational Polytheism Faust Member Posts: 1,223 Kudos: 0 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #1 on: 2 September 2003, 11:13 » No offense but you are one sick man Calum. Logged Yesterday it worked Today it is not working Windows is like that -- http://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/error-haiku.html suselinux Member Posts: 711 Kudos: 30 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #2 on: 2 September 2003, 11:33 » quote: Originally posted by Calum: yes, you read correctly, i said microsoft windows, and this is the alternate OSs section! this is just a little note to mention that i am going to try and install a custom version of mswindows, using this page as a jump off point: http://www.gaby.de/win3x/esoft.htm Basically, i want to have FreeDOS as the (open source) operating system, run windows (3.11 for workgroups) over the top, with some GNU apps for DOS, and have Calmira (open source) provide the actual GUI! I will be interested in what sort of non-MS networking and so on i an come up with too. i already have a netscape and mosaic to run on there, plus an old winamp 1.x and so forth. just letting you know. it amuses me to think of mswindows sandwiched between two bits of open source software. the trouble will be getting it all to work together using only configuration (i cannot code, as i am duff). DR. Calum Frankenstien It all sounds very intersting to me, but please don't post any screens. I want to wait until the final version is out before I see LongHorn HAHA I kinda wonder why MS dosen't release the source code for windows 3x, they aren't going to make any more money from it. Did, or does OS/2 run on a DOS back end Calum, I have to ask what was your inspiration? Logged hm_murdock VIP Posts: 2,629 Kudos: 378 The Lord of Thyme Microsoft Windows! « Reply #3 on: 2 September 2003, 15:18 » OS/2 is the back-end. it's not graphical in of itself. like Windows 9x, OS/2 runs a GUI shell over a text-based OS. However, unlike 9x, the OS below is 32-bit protected mode and is stable, fast, and supports all the cool shit Logged Go the fuck ~ Calum Global Moderator Posts: 7,812 Kudos: 1000 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #4 on: 2 September 2003, 20:21 » also OS/2 supports MSDOS and windows 3.11 binaries also, but there are four reasons OS/2 never caught on: 1) direct competition with microsoft windows 2) everybody says OS/2 is really a bitch to administrate 3) OS/2 is stupidly expensive 4) slow moving sales, crap marketing, no compelling app, no reason to buy or switch to it. back to "the project", no inspiration, i just read a lot of these people going on about how they want to remove pbrush, windows mediocre player and internet exploder from their computers, or use a shell other than explorer, but for some reason they want to keep windows. well i have dabbled in all that in the past, with limited success, and linux really answers all those issues better than any windows customisation could, but the fact is there are a lot of things come out since 1995, to enhance win3.11 and i thought well, older ms stuff will probably be less noncustomisable, plus why not try to kludge together as much of this as possible to come up with a working OS, with as much of it open source as possible... i'm not saying it'll even work in the slightest, i suspect i will be waiting on FreeDOS to make a windows compatible version to be honest, and i could never get Desqview (the closed source port of X for MSDOS) to work, but this might be something to do with it's activation code, and the fact that you can now legally use it, but you have to get an illegal seeming activation code, plus you have to download and create all the disks yourself. i may have done it all wrong, since there's little help and no support out there for it. Anyway, i'm just interested in it. i'll have to look and see if there's a way i can install bash on a DOS system too, because the DOS CLI really sucks, although the FreeDOS crowd have really* done a good job of adding the best bits of bash to their CLI. * this was another ill fated competitor to MSwindows that was out about the same time as OS/2. the company that sold desqview wasn't as big as IBM, so they went bust. Logged visit these websites and make yourself happy forever: It's my music! \| My music on MySpace \| Integrational Polytheism Faust Member Posts: 1,223 Kudos: 0 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #5 on: 2 September 2003, 21:31 » quote: I kinda wonder why MS dosen't release the source code for windows 3x, they aren't going to make any more money from it. There are some evil deeds even Microsoft wont do? No that can't be right there's no depth they wont stoop to... Aha! I know what it is! They've trained a team of ninja hypnotists to sneak into the homes of all the Free Software and Open Source developers and read out bits of the Windows 3.1 source code. Then they go and put bits of Windows 3.1 in the source for their apps and so everything starts crashing. When Gates see's all the GNU/Linux / BSD OS's crashing he knows that it's time to strike and reveals the Windows 3.1 code in the Linux kernel reviving his slain mutant henchman Darl McBride to start a massive legal war bigger than the original SCO affair! And he'll get away with it too if it isn't for a team of "anti-ninja-hypnotist-rocket-launcher" equipped gnus, penguins and devils! We must find all the gnus, penguins and devils we can and train them into an army of warriors! Muah ha ha ha! Logged Yesterday it worked Today it is not working Windows is like that -- http://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/error-haiku.html Windows_SuX_@$$ Member Posts: 233 Kudos: 0 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #6 on: 2 September 2003, 22:31 » What kind of person wants Windows3.1 ?!?!?! That windows is shit, yes in that one they dont spy on you because I dont think Internet was alaviable at that time. It comes with all shit shit like paint, calulater, SHIT SUX, and this screen willl explain what happens on everywindows and will never be fixed http://www.gaby.de/win3x/screens/nov01.gif Ideots that work for microsoft should realy work on the windows registry to make it more stable because it was always the same Logged Signatures can appear at the bottom of your posts. This option may be disabled by the message board administrators at any time, however. You may use UBB Code in your signature, but not HTML. UBBCode Images are permitted. mobrien_12 VIP Posts: 2,138 Kudos: 711 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #7 on: 3 September 2003, 00:27 » quote: Originally posted by suselinux: I kinda wonder why MS dosen't release the source code for windows 3x, they aren't going to make any more money from it. Thats not the Microsoft Way. Caldera used to do this when they were Caldera and not SCO. Also, MS claimed they lost the source code. Caldera sued MS over the built in incompatibilities of windows with DRDOS. When the courts ordered MS to produce the source code.. your honor we can't find it anymore. Logged In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight.... mobrien_12 VIP Posts: 2,138 Kudos: 711 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #8 on: 3 September 2003, 00:29 » Calum, last I knew FreeDOS couldn't run Windows 3.1x. Has this changed?? Logged In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight.... Calum Global Moderator Posts: 7,812 Kudos: 1000 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #9 on: 3 September 2003, 01:12 » quote: Originally posted by Windows_SuX_@$$: What kind of person wants Windows3.1 ?!?!?! That windows is shit, yes in that one they dont spy on you because I dont think Internet was alaviable at that time. AH AH! strike one! the Internet has been around since the seventies, and its predecessors have been kicking about since the late sixties. Bill Gates did not however admit that the Internet was worth anything until 1995 when he realised that he had better make it worth something because mosaic was going to get the de facto standard for the world wide web if he didn't buy it out. earlier versions of windows 95 did not come with IE or so i have heard, it was available as an add on, kind of like a service pack (after gates bought the mosaic browser and renamed it to internet exploiter). And while i agree that that windows is shit, i put it to you that it is the best mswindows ever released for many reasons, depending on your outlook. I reckon it crashes less, does its job properly, admits it's not an OS, merely a GUI. given networking sucks the ass off a thousand donkeys, but hey, that's microsoft. plus you can get it for ten quid off of ebay totally legally and with NO requirement to put in some activation code. quote: It comes with all shit shit like paint, calulater, SHIT SUX, well, in windows 3.11 you can (if you want to remove mspaint) simply type "del c:\windows\pbrush.exe" and that's it done! there's no registry (a HUGE problem with later windowss in my opinion) and few dlls. a lot more of the OS is scripts (which are human readable and human editable) instead of meaningless jibberish designed to obfuscate all configuration to mere mortals. quote: and this screen willl explain what happens on everywindows and will never be fixed http://www.gaby.de/win3x/screens/nov01.gif um, i actually suspect (although i am not in any way betting on it) that that shot has been doctored. it says in the URL that it's windows 3x but look, it has a windows start menu and toolbar which was not included in windows until windows 95 (and was seen in RiscOS seven years earlier) and although there are a couple of programs to emulate this bar in win3.x, they don't look like that. In my opinion that's windows NT 3.x attempting to run a 32 bit windows 95 program, is it not? in which case my windows for workgroups 3.11 will not be affected. thank your lucky stars it's not a blue screen of death. I quote: deots that work for microsoft should realy work on the windows registry to make it more stable because it was always the same i'm sorry but you cannot get away with using the words "windows registry" and "stable" inconjunction with each other. that is ridiculous. trying to fix the windows registry is like pissing into a hurricane. each program should have its own configuration files and those should be kept in /etc and any files that need to be written to should be kept within a hidden directory within the user's home directory. eg program: amsn keeps config info within ~/.amsn et cetera. this works fine in linux, bsd, et cetera, and i have seen it at work in windows using open source programs such as gaim, mozilla firebird and filezilla. this is sensible because if one file gets corrupted then the rest are unnafected. and since /etc is read only to normal users, the chance of corruption is incredibly minimal. by contrast the registry is contained within only five files, all of which are open for read/write access by all users at all times! now that's fucking stupid! finally the idea here is not to have windows 3.11 as such, it's to have FreeDOS running mswindows 3.11 as the network and bitmapping software with calmira as the GUI. basically i see the rols of mswindows as being similar to XFree86 in a normal linux distribution. pointless and stupid, in case you didn't get it Logged visit these websites and make yourself happy forever: It's my music! \| My music on MySpace \| Integrational Polytheism Calum Global Moderator Posts: 7,812 Kudos: 1000 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #10 on: 3 September 2003, 01:20 » quote: Originally posted by M. O'Brien: Calum, last I knew FreeDOS couldn't run Windows 3.1x. Has this changed?? nope, as far as i know it still can't run windows 3.1x, but FreeDOS 0.9b now has a native CDROM driver, which is a big step forward in my opinion, plus back at 0.8b there were rumours that some people had indeed managed to get windows to run on there, although i don't know how. I do have some exe file which claims to alter MSDOS7 and above so that windows 3.11 can run on it, eg: you get windows 95 or 98, remove the GUI bits and install windows 3.11 on it, but you get an incompatibility error, which this file claims to fix. so i am hoping that it can fix this issue with FreeDOS also, since this is the same error i see whn i try to install mswindows over FreeDOS (or did in 0.8b anyway) oddly enough i couldn't get ANY GUI to work under FreeDOS, and i tried 3 or 4. no that's a lie, i did get one to load up but couldn't get the mouse to go. can't remember which one it was though. Logged visit these websites and make yourself happy forever: It's my music! \| My music on MySpace \| Integrational Polytheism bossesjoe Member Posts: 75 Kudos: 0 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #11 on: 3 September 2003, 01:44 » quote: Originally posted by suselinux: I kinda wonder why MS dosen't release the source code for windows 3x, they aren't going to make any more money from it. Because most of it is the same as Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP, NT, and so on... Logged M$ is proof that capitalism has failed.-Macman Calum Global Moderator Posts: 7,812 Kudos: 1000 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #12 on: 3 September 2003, 02:09 » it can't be simply because the binaries for the whole of MSDOS 6.22 and windows for workgroups including the extra printer drivers fit onto eleven floppies. so most of it has to have been added later for windows 98, 2000, xp etc. i suspect that not much code has survived from windows' GUI days through to the 2000/XP releases to be honest since they would likely need to recompile even all the things they have left relatively the same, which would likely involve large rewrites for updated file formats and to implement new API to replace some of the deprecated API in mswindows 3.x. Sorry, i know that's boring, but i suspect it is true. To be honest i think they are worried that if they release the code for windows 3.11, a team of hackers will get together and make some GPL version of windows which will threaten to take what part of the market has not already gone to the BSD/Linux mob. can you imagine a GPL development model fueled mswindows, based on mswindows 3.11? before any of that registry stuff? all the mistakes in windows since about 1993 could be identified, avoided and generally better solutions could be made. bad code could be replaced and within a few years a monster open source windows could be competing with the 'real' thing. of course by this time the two windowss would not be all that intercompatible. there would be programs that ran on both of course, and all the open source programs (thunderbird, mozilla, openoffice.org) would have versions for both etc, but as you can see now, one would be free. and it would be more stable. and all the open source programs would run on it. and they would be free. and unlike linux it has two advantages: 1) it really is windows, so the sheep would not balk at using it 2) it really is windows, so an unspecified amount of windows software will actually run on it, as is. with no emulators. that's why it will never happen. Logged visit these websites and make yourself happy forever: It's my music! \| My music on MySpace \| Integrational Polytheism mobrien_12 VIP Posts: 2,138 Kudos: 711 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #13 on: 3 September 2003, 03:03 » quote: Originally posted by Calum: oddly enough i couldn't get ANY GUI to work under FreeDOS, and i tried 3 or 4. no that's a lie, i did get one to load up but couldn't get the mouse to go. can't remember which one it was though. You can run win 3.11 it on DRDOS/OpenDOS, but its not perfect... and despite the free for personal use clause you might feel dirty using a product from the company that once was Caldera. Anyway, you have to be really careful with the extended memory managers in Freedos when you try GUI's. There are 2 or 3 memory managers and they are mutually exclusive and from what I remember there were like only 1 or 2 that would work with Seal or GEM You probably got GEM to work but needed to set the mouse driver to busmouse (that is the setting to use the DOS mouse drivers). [ September 02, 2003: Message edited by: M. O'Brien ] Logged In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight.... Windows_SuX_@$$ Member Posts: 233 Kudos: 0 Microsoft Windows! « Reply #14 on: 3 September 2003, 11:45 » Calum I mean they should Make it more stable, Wen I was messing around with alot of backdoors many of them [including the famous sub7{virus not Trojan prog}]edit your registry so when you start your windows box the virus runs so they can get in at any given time [ unless u got a firewall ] and after I deleted the viruses from my unorganized windows folder I noticed I had to edit my registry because when I restarted [ what u have to do to windows because its crap ] several messages apeard that this file can not be found so I had to edit my registry, windows should log one warning in a special registry edit folder and delete that from registry because many people dont know how to change the windows registry and it can be quite confusiong, the ideots at microsoft should organize it more 2, they say windows is the best and it won all these awards when its 200$ on plain shit also securitty sux, you can litteraly send someone a batch file to delete shit like rundll easily and fuck up their PC I dont know if you can do this on Linux I havent installed Mandrake yetm [im a noob to linux] Logged Signatures can appear at the bottom of your posts. This option may be disabled by the message board administrators at any time, however. You may use UBB Code in your signature, but not HTML. UBBCode Images are permitted. Print Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Up « previous next » Stop Microsoft » Forum » Operating Systems » Not Quite Mainstream OSes » Microsoft Windows!
Share or donate

Author Topic: Microsoft Windows! (Read 1312 times)

Share or donate