Digg this topic Add to my del.icio.us Submit to SlashDot 3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Windows NT 3.51, aka Windows 1993
wendy
post Jan 27 2007, 07:30 AM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Lady
Posts: 55
Joined: 16-July 06
From: one mile from the QR main line
Member No.: 13


Australia


I decided to take a look at windows 3.51. This is one of the older ancesters of Windows 2k/xp etc.

The UI looks very much like Windows 3.1 and DOS. But deep in the heart of this is beating the same VMS core that powers win xp.

Still, the overall install diskette can be trimmed down to 70 MB, but i have also the resource kit (50 MB), and SP5 (27 MB unpacked) on the same cdrom. There's also some kind of post sp5 package, which has updated files to allow it to read/write to fat32, and a few other niceties. There are a few other features for modern iron as well.

There's also Newshell, the experimental "explorer" like interface for Win3x, but this is incredibly buggy. I uninstalled the blighter.

Still. It's a nice OS, and it will dual boot with something like XP.

W
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheHive
post Jan 27 2007, 03:20 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 1,868
Joined: 14-July 06
Member No.: 5



Thanks for the info. Good read.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon Goon
post Jan 31 2007, 01:25 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Advanced user
Posts: 183
Joined: 1-August 06
Member No.: 95



I think 3.51 was supposed to be the optimised version of 3.5. I tried it a few times and got nowhere. Poor Internet Explorer 5 crashed endlessly. Disk defragmentation utilities could destroy the filesystem because M$ made slight, undocumented changes to NTFS.

The only way this would be viable is if it could be booted from RAM and work with files on modern NTFS partitions.. seems like an impossible task, but I can dream (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nuno Brito
post Jan 31 2007, 01:39 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 4,218
Joined: 13-July 06
From: Azores
Member No.: 1


Portugal


Also found the link to the Chicago edition review: http://toastytech.com/guis/chic58.html - this was the ancestor to win9x back in 1993, why have they insisted on Chicago and Windows 95 when there was an NT OS already available? (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Wendy, can you post some screenshots - seems a really interesting OS.. (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MedEvil
post Jan 31 2007, 02:09 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 1,288
Joined: 29-December 06
Member No.: 2,192



QUOTE(Nuno Brito @ Jan 31 2007, 02:39 PM) *
Also found the link to the Chicago edition review: http://toastytech.com/guis/chic58.html - this was the ancestor to win9x back in 1993, why have they insisted on Chicago and Windows 95 when there was an NT OS already available? (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Wendy, can you post some screenshots - seems a really interesting OS.. (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)

Because of DOS and Win3.1 compatibility.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon Goon
post Jan 31 2007, 02:14 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Advanced user
Posts: 183
Joined: 1-August 06
Member No.: 95



Got some screenshots right here:

http://www.guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/winnt351

I remember the betas of Windows 95.. They were MORE STABLE than the finished product. Multitasking was smoother too. Although this could just be my experience *shrugs*
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
wendy
post Feb 1 2007, 07:53 AM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Lady
Posts: 55
Joined: 16-July 06
From: one mile from the QR main line
Member No.: 13


Australia


I may well dig around and post screen shots of the OS.

I have some rather interesting patches to it, too. One, for example, allows Win351 to read/write to fat32 partitions, along with the usual fat16 and hpfs partitions. The nr 2 box (where it lives at the mo), has both of these (os2 and win98). It can read upto the 48 bit limit (ie 137 GB), with a suitable fix.

At the moment, i only have 16bit drivers for it (vga), so it's still rather quiet. must hunt down drivers for it.

In the main, i found the raw OS rather interesting.

As with winnt4, one can slipstream odds and ends to allow installation on modern iron. The as-provided kit did this ok, but when i slipped in some updates, eg fastdisk.sys, this became quite elegant.

W
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nuno Brito
post Feb 1 2007, 09:35 AM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: .script developer
Posts: 4,218
Joined: 13-July 06
From: Azores
Member No.: 1


Portugal


This might sound like a naive question since we're talking about an NT system, but can it run 32bit apps? (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon Goon
post Feb 1 2007, 05:51 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Advanced user
Posts: 183
Joined: 1-August 06
Member No.: 95



QUOTE(Nuno Brito @ Feb 1 2007, 04:35 AM) *
This might sound like a naive question since we're talking about an NT system, but can it run 32bit apps? (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)


Wendy probably has a more accurate answer for this, but.. yes and no (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

It can run apps with a very early subset of Win32 calls. I would guess that any Win32 app that can run on Windows 3.11 with Win32s tacked on can run on NT 3.51. It really is random chance though. Like I mentioned before, IE 5 barely ran (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

At the time Intel thought that true 32 bit operating systems and software would dominate the world. Alas, M$ proved them wrong with Windows 95, 98 and ME (IMG:../forums/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
wendy
post Feb 2 2007, 08:00 AM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Lady
Posts: 55
Joined: 16-July 06
From: one mile from the QR main line
Member No.: 13


Australia


One must realise that it's not so much '32-bitness', but particular API's that might be supported. No version of Windows supports the 32-bit APIs from either OS/2 or BeOS. Still, Windows 3.51 supports a set of APIs that were used in Windows systems at that time.

Windows 3.1, 3.11, NT 3.1, NT 3.51, NT 4.0 and 95 all appeared before Microsoft discovered the internet, so there's no browser supplied. Many of the 'explorer' intergrations were not present: only NT4 and 95 even featured the explorer interface.

NT 3.51 basically is a composite of Windows 3.1, NT 3.1, and Win-32 addin. In essence, you can run programs that rely on the older Win32 API. The registry exists. but .reg files are not. Use regedt32.exe to read it. Programs that make use of new or redirected APIs in NT4 and later generally don't work.

I tried 4NT 2.52, tcmd32 1.02, winrexx 3.5, and file commander 2.2 on it. All of these worked as expected. I ought try norton commander/win on it too. the latest version of TSE/Win works. On the other hand, some programs that i have in my tweakme directory (autoruns, unknowndevices), did not work.

I have not got a video driver for it as yet, so we're using vga. Such is how it was in Windows...

One notes, that some of the WinXP programs are not even recognised as valid win32 apps by windows 2k.

W
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · OS2 and Windows 3x/9x · Next Newest »
 

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic

Collapse

> Similar Topics

  Topic Replies Topic Starter Views Last Action
No New Posts NTDLL errors with TFTD32
Getting random errors during multiple installs
0 kloudfreak 35 16th October 2007 - 12:29 AM
Last post by: kloudfreak
No New Posts Pinned: Windows NT Service Pack integration (slipstreaming) toolkit
tested with: Workstation, Server, Terminal Server CDs
4 bearwindows 654 11th October 2007 - 05:15 PM
Last post by: bearwindows
No new Topic has attachmentsWindows (Msi) Installer 4.0.6000.16386
InstallShield (R) 11 & InstallShield (R) Setup Engine 6
26 Max_Real Qnx 2,246 10th September 2007 - 01:53 PM
Last post by: Max_Real Qnx
No New Posts Windows OPK
Why do I wind up doing this?
2 DaemonForce 440 5th September 2007 - 09:59 AM
Last post by: DaemonForce
No New Posts Windows XP running in 8Mhz CPU with 20Mb RAM
Experiments to lower minimum supported hardware
3 Nuno Brito 537 5th September 2007 - 06:15 AM
Last post by: TheHive


 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th October 2007 - 01:12 PM

MKPortal ©2003-2006 mkportal.it