>2016
>Not part of the 3.1 Master race
What's your excuse, /g/?
>>54873731
The usual
>>54873731
I have so many fond memories watching VCD Chinese cartoons on my dad's Gateway 486 with the turbo button.
Hahhhhhh.
>>54873731
Windows 1-3.1 was just DOS with a GUI.
>>54873731
>Windows 3.11
>Not DOS 6.22
I bet you are running a 486 SX, get on my level 486DX2, DOS 6.22
>>54874371
No, Windows 1.00 - Windows 98 where.
>>54874411
If I recall, windows 95 and 98 was much more DOS independent.
>>54874461
good post
>>54874495
They literary used DOS as a kernel.
>>54874532
>windows had pre-emptive multitasking
>DOS has no pre-emptive multitasking
>They literary used DOS as a kernel
Which was the OS with the macro support?
>>54874623
>implying virtualbox counts
kids these days lol
>>54874555
Yup, don't see the problem.
Even Win3.11 has preemptive multitasking, not only cooperative.
3.11, 95, 98, all hook onto DOS if you run them, you do know you can just initialize Windows from DOS and quit Windows back to DOS?
3.11 is just 16bit, 95/98 are 32bit, but all of them run on DOS.
Also what the fuck has your argument even to do with anything?
A kernel is a cooperative task running a preemptive capable system.
Oh wait, your argument does not mean anything, because you're a lausy troll.
Good everyone else learned at least something.
>>54873731
it doesn't have cool looking defrag
I like 6.2 more.
>>54874730
sorry retard I have no need for win3.x on actual hardware, now kys.
>>54874758
>A kernel is a cooperative task running a preemptive capable system.
is this nigger serious?
I prefer 95
>>54875079
>utorrent
enjoy china botnet
I prefer Mac System 8.
>>54875092
Unless you can point to a better torrent client that works on 95 then i don't care.
>>54874758
> 16-bit flat address space non multitasking interrupt hooking program loader for a protected mode kernel.
You are literally the definition of a fucking retard
>>54874555
the NT kernel from 98 and 95 is a plain .sys file running on DOS
>>54875278
>Windows 95 and 98
>NT kernel
please just get a trip aaaaaaaarhrhrhghghrg
>>54875278
>NT kernel from 98 and 95
You can't make this shit up
Was working on a program retrieval from a customers hard drive today, they'd let the local electrician at it and now it wasn't working.
>Looking through directories
>realize the customer's electrician had been trying to 'fix' whatever he'd done by copying the windows directory into every one of the directories in the drive.
>Original program directory has been deleted and due to electrician data retrieval wont work because overwrites on a 25 year old hard drive.
>realize it's windows 3.1
>Start Taskman
>Taskman loads, shows all the stuff the Windows 7 PC is running as if native.
>Kek, microshit have changed so little in 24 years that the first version of taskman still functions
>spend next hour and a half playing with Painter
>>54875292
>>54875312
problem solved, as you say yourself, 95 and 98 ain't NT based, they are DOS based
>>54875327
>microshit have changed so little
They just haven't changed the syntax to get the correct running list of processes.
>>54875327
>>54875368
And trust me, Window 7 didn't run it "native" it had a whole legacy subsystem to run that shit.
>>54875330
????
>windows has its own drivers
>windows has its own API
>windows does the multitasking
>windows does the I/O
>windows loads windows-based application
>windows doesn't use DOS services
>DOS is used early in the bootstrapping process
>>54875327
>Implying theres not a whole subsystem dedicated to stupid fucks who run old programs
Why change battle tested stable code
>>54873731
I use TempleOS
>>54873731
>maxresdefault.jpg
>33 replies
Y'all should end your're selves.
>>54875544
Holy shit Sherlock, I would never be able to tell it's a youtube screenshot from the black edges and video compression.
system 8 and 7 tbqh
>>54875584
>>54875694
>>54875584
>tfw I got a PowerMac G4 dual 866MHz with Leopard/Mac OS 9.22 dualboot next to me right now, with a glorous 24 inch Lacie CRT.
3.1 is god awful, the interface is so fuckhuge that it makes even 1280x1024 feel like 640x480, my 486 is totally unusable with that trash
system 7 did the GUI better at that time hands down, DOS is a fucking kludge
>>54874794
What about defrag under dos?
we have 3 machines at work that are still on windows 3.1. Would cost more to recreate the program for a modern OS than it is to just keep the running with the occasional spare part from ebay.
>>54874371
see, this is a lie (hell, even for Win 1 and 2)
DOS boots the machine, you run Windows, and now Windows is doing everything on its own, from drivers to applications. Even running a DOS program under Windows involves Windows having to fuck around a bunch.
DOS is literally just a bootloader.
dumb shit: actual DOS programs actually are preempted under 3.x on a 386 or better, unlike Windows programs (which cooperatively multitask between each other)
it runs an entire copy of DOS under a hypervisor when you're using a 386 for each DOS program
>>54875058
that guy can't type for shit, but 3.1 literally runs DOS boxes as a preempted task with their own copy of DOS inside and their own chunk of memory to fuck with
there's actually issues because of this (I read some story of a guy who ran what was supposed to be a hard real-time system to control some shit under Windows, but because it would interrupt the DOS program to regain control, that guarantee was gone)
>>54875584
fix your apple icon (IIRC, you just switch to a greyscale mode and then back to color and it's fixed for good -- something to do with it checking the PRAM about a flag that gets set when you change color depths rather than looking at the actual color depth)
man, Platinum is so nice
OS9 makes it look significantly nicer despite changing almost nothing (the color it uses is a tad warmer, and it makes all the difference).
>>54875079
95 is easily the nicest MS OS of them all.
well, at least in terms of usability, because it's unstable as shit if left on for extended periods of time (days) and any unstable program being run can leave the system even more unstable until the next reboot
>>54878413
Not my image. Just picked it off internet due to laziness.
>>54876082
I have a Powermac, 512k Macintosh and I have an eMac soon to arrive.
I'm a fan of pre-retard Apple software and hardware. I kinda like OSX 10.5 but thats about it tbqh
>>54878581
Got a eMac too!
And Macintosh Classic with memory expansion and 40MB HDD.
Gotta love that old Apple stuff!
>>54878676
Sadly the 512k Mac has a broken display - screen is fine but FT isn't and my soldering is crap- but the eMac should be pretty great.
Its sad that they've basically turned into just another PC manufacturer. After they transitioned to Intel they basically dropped the ball imo.
>>54878718
Yea, indeed.
What's that custom architecture tho they are working on with AMD? I heard they are going APU with AMD but not just normal x86.
>>54878778
I hadn't heard of that. Source?
If so it would be nice for them to be an actual PC alternative.
>>54878838
http://wccftech.com/amd-making-custom-x86-soc-apple-imacs-2017-2018/
Ah custom x86 not a different architecture, forgot
>booted up pentium 1 some hours ago
>hdd seems to have become louder but the machine is working fine
>>54878866
I'm kinda glad that its not Intel but quite disappointing.
>tfw even DOS can multitask
