91–100 of 131 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While this is true, there is certainly a point where backward compatibility becomes a bit absurd. I'd personally peg it around the 15-year mark.
Absurd, and extremely profitable for the vendor which provides it. IBM mainframes can run binaries that are nearly 45 years old for example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While this is true, there is certainly a point where backward compatibility becomes a bit absurd. I'd personally peg it around the 15-year mark.
Absurd, and extremely profitable for the vendor which provides it. IBM mainframes can run binaries that are nearly 45 years old for example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While this is true, there is certainly a point where backward compatibility becomes a bit absurd. I'd personally peg it around the 15-year mark.
Absurd, and extremely profitable for the vendor which provides it. IBM mainframes can run binaries that are nearly 45 years old for example.
Granted, she also doesn't have to worry about whether or not her 12-year-old copy of freeware Whist software will work either.
Still, I think there is a big difference between a mainframe manufacturer taking on the burden and selling it to corporate customers and Microsoft forcing that burden onto millions of "normal" people
EDIT: Clarification in opening sentence.
Brilliant. A number of comments: * He mentions there is no multi tasking in dosshell. I'm not 100% sure about MS-DOS 5.0, but in ver 6.0 you could switch between tasks in dosshell [EDIT: this is also true for version 5.0, you can see the option at 1:13 in his video]. To switch tasks you need to first enable it through the "Options" menu ("Enable Task Swapper") and then you can either switch tasks by the all too famil…
in ver 6.0 you could switch between tasks in dosshell That was task swapping, not multitasking. All but the currently-executing task were interrupted, written out to disk, and expunged from memory.
In MS-DOS you could terminate a program, but make 64K of its memory resident. And then you could program a time interrupt handler to wake it up and do stuff periodically.
That's how some viruses worked btw :-)
God, the memories. I remember booting up Windows 95 for the first time -- I was so stoked. Everything was so new and smooth and perfect. Plus -- and this is the important thing -- PPP worked much, much better than 3.1 + trumpet winsock. Some time around 98SE I was dual booting into BeOS, which was so damn fast it wasn't funny. But it wasn't to be. And I remember browbeating Red Hat 3 into connecting to the internet a…
It feels so nostalgic. I started using the Computer even since Windows 95 was launched. I first tried installing the Windows 98 on my PC. Man, I really appreciate this guy's patience.
I got it with MS-DOS 6.22, Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and MS Works (forgot which version).
I had to turn that video off to maintain my personal pride. I may be a nerd, but by gosh, I do NOT watch Windows installation retrospectives for entertainment! :)
He left out Windows ME. I guess that would be too much to ask.
The point of the video was chronicling Windows upgrades. ME wasn't an upgrade. :)