Windows 3.0 OS Software

I have a old 80mb hdd with win 3.1 on, I think it still works

Win 3.0 might be hard to find.

most torrents sites (the most important ones) don't work here in the UAE. I could have given you the download link if I could.

just try them. I'm pretty sure it must be out there somewhere just waiting to be found. good luck!

To be able to run Windows 3, you have to have both DOS 6 and Windows 3 setup-packages.

Windows 3 is installed as a DOS application, and it auto-boots by the aid of a config.sys file and another, suitable batch-file

Write me on CR4 mail and we'll see what can be done about it.

Just checked, and the earliest floppy sets I have are DOS 6.20 (6 discs) and Win 3.11 (8 discs).

These are worth a fortune, as collector's items - I AM NOT KIDDING.

DOS 6.20 was the first issue to allow For Win 3 mount with full GUI and multimedia, and Win 3.11 was the last version of it's kind (before Win 95 came out) to allow localised versions with sixty-something odd languages.

I have DOS 4, DOS 5 (in five inch floppy), DOS 6.22 (Hebrew Enabled), and Win 2.0, Win 3.0, and Win 3.11 (Hebrew Enabled) - all in 3.5 inch floppy

Crikey ! I wish they had authentic labels on them .

If you're feeling a bit retro, these might amuse. More than a bit expensive, though. I've seen promotional CD's, the size/shape of credit cards, so you can probably get your own 'floppy' CD made made up for cheaper.

So, like - what ? - A rectangular object spinning in your CD tray ?

The vibration rattle alone would take it apart !

I can't see that it's being square should be a problem mechanically, but it's a waste of space in more ways than one ! Almost a contender for that other thread on expensive/pointless things, though it might be a giggle to give it to someone who had a floppy drive People with chubby fingers could hold it by the corner so they don't damage the data area. You could even do a Darwin, and hold one in your mouth when you already hold two and see a third you like. According to a biography I read, he once sold some heirloom of his wife's to buy a snooker table. I can't back that up, but here is the supplier (http://www.elstonandhopkin.co.uk/blog/?m=200610 - sorry, link no longer available). What a dude !

"...a waste of space in more ways than one ..." - That's why solid-state rules. Today you have USB thumb-drives at 32 GB for 160 $. These, coming from, say, San-Disk or Kingston, also have a lifetime-warranty, which is a joke of course because in a two year's time, while still perfectly operational, will be considered obsolete in terms of volume or features.

Oops.... you set me off.....I like these ;

I don't even have 32 Gigs used on the Hard Drive of the computer I'm using now. It's like a variation of Parkinson's Law ; Applications expand to take up the storage available to them. The gap between 'must-have' and 'need' grows ever greater in all areas of life.

This is so frickin true

"...Applications expand to take up the storage available to them..."

- also: "hardware speed increases just to keep the PC response-time at a steady lowest possible over the years..."

- or: "Bloatware will expand in take-up resources, just to keep the increase in hardware speed steadily marginal"

Was I way-off ?

This drives me CRAZY!!

My P75 has a boot time about the same as my new laptop. 286, 386, 486, P1, P2, P3, P4, P123456... it doesn't matter. Same generally crappy speed in a standard configuration.

Newer, faster, bigger, better computer doesn't mean squat to anyone trying to run basic apps under Windows.

I guess it's my fault for sticking with Windows. I ran with Linux back when it was developing fast, but it took time. These days I just don't have the time.... so I waste time waiting. Kind of ironic isn't it.

Right on the spot

The time was around 1979. The place was Boca Raton Florida. Two IBM engineers were chatting. One says to the other "Lets provide our computer with a memory capability of 640 Kbytes. That is 10 times what anyone else has, and no one ever should need more memory than that!"

YEAH RIGHT!!

Bill

Hello,

Thanx to Bondy, I now have windows 3.0.

I already have DOS 6.22.

Should I be using DOS 5.0 or 6.0 instead to run 3.0 properly?

As I said, I'm a newbie at this, my advanced age notwithstanding!

Ken

P.S. It's shortly after noon on Thursday here. What is it there in Israel?

No, the later version the DOS, the better, especially in regard to fdisk.exe chkdsk and and format programs - the all debugged file-system and disk-integrity utilities - to ensure smooth platform for Windows to run.

Again: Windows 3 is not a real Operating-System, as it is a GUI centralised application for DOS.

I have windows 3.0 on my computer, how would you like it?

Don't forget you'll need a smaller drive to load onto since it won't recognize todays larger drives.

With DOS 6.22 it will recognise any partition smaller than 2 GB, provided it was allocated and formatted as FAT-16 (file-system)

.....and I've also got 6.22 which appears to have been on 3 discs (?).

FAT 16 ... wow haven't heard that in a while.

I think I'm right in saying it was better than the later FAT32. The fact that FAT 16 wasted space was no longer a problem when storage/memory capacity increased. Something like that

You're in for a boatload of issues if you try to run that on modern hardware.

I have to agree with Stevem. Windows 3.0 is as far from today's Windows as a canoe is from a motorboat. Aside from the hardware aspects, learning one will not help understanding or using the other. If you're worried about cost, start with Windows 95 or thereabouts - they're probably more readily available and most likely free. Besides, there are truckoads of help sites on the internet for using the newer versions of Windows, but probably few for old OS's.

I have Win3.11 running in a Virtual Machine. It is relatively small (20M) and works perfectly. You would be responsible for installing VMWare Viewer.

Let me know where you want it, and I will upload to your site.

addendum: Actually, when zipped up, it fits under the usual > 10Mb email attachment limitation. So, if you would like, I could also email you the zipped up VMware image.

Hi,

Do you mean you have Windows 3.0 OS software, not 3.1? I already have 3.1 from another reader.

Ken

nope... do not have 3.0 or earlier releases, sorry. Win3.11 in a virtual is the best I can do.

You must have a lot of time on your hands...

Hi,

I think I get it. My addy is Erin-Go-Braugh33@twcny.rr.com

Thanx.

Ken

it is on the way

I'll keep an eye out for it (Sandy Duncan).

Ken

Ken- I do! I have MS DOS 6.0 and Windows 3.0 on 3.5" floppys. Complete set of each. eduardo

Regards

It had 2 versions; 3.1 without Networking & 3.11 with networking.

Some 20 floppies.

The condition of floppies now ???

If one does not open all the Set is useless.

Start from Win98Se. It was on CD.

Pray you could get any

I also have 3.11, and back in 1996, I placed all the Windows setup files on a CDROM, and it not only worked fine, but also made the setup run 20 times faster.

You need of course to install DOS first, but this can only be done through floppies.

So, floppies are only needed for DOS installation, but Windows 311 can be done from CDROM or even another (Slave) Hard-Disk, or another partition on the same drive.

I also placed my Win 2.1 and Win 3.1 with some old apps here, if anyone wants to reminisce with this ancient stuff, as well as a suitable version of office from the good old days

Regards.

Yes ! You are correct.

I also copied on HD in the same directory. [I didn't have CD Writer].

Only the 1st floppy has a number of files including Setup file; & the subsequent floppies has the name somewhat like: disk2 .. 3 4 or like it & there was no file was overwriting any previos file.

Instead of asking for :"Insert xx Floppy" Setup picked up all the files itself.

At that time I used the Directory ofHD to re-install.

And Win 95 had a Cabs directory for re-install.

Regards

For those of us, who remember installing Win 95:

When you installed the operating-system and it got to where you had to write the installation key (serial number required for installation) - it had an "Ignore" button, right next to it, and if you pressed it, it didn't insist on having the installation key !

I think it was a time when Microsoft had a tough fight for the market, so they tried to entice every one to install Win 95 regardless of it being legal or pirated copy...

Regards.

If you had read the licence [In Fine print had it been] the software was not for a single machine or person.

I think it started late from Win98SE or even later.

And you also remember that Floppies were 1.68MB called by MS as Cab size formatting.

I had at least more than Floppy programs but HD-COPY was the only program of formatting

to 1.68Mb & no other programm could do. [which I tried ]

One more thing in HD-COPY is in disk-2-disk copy, you need not to switch source & Target floppies if you need

more than one copy.

I always made DOS-9 Emergency-Disk [Boot-disk] on this 1.68MB disks through HD-COPY with system files

and copying rest of the files from a directory EBD & copying also a cab file's files by Pk-unzip or extract.exe.

Later some programs "UBD" & like very helpful to make EBD even in other windows [ME & above]

I got this info from:

--= = = = = = =

http://www.computerhope.com/

Microsoft DOS format command

...

Default settings are strongly recommended for general use.

NTFS supports 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16K, 32K, 64K.

FAT supports 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16K, 32K, 64K, (128K, 256K for sector size > 512 bytes).

FAT32 supports 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16K, 32K, 64K, (128K, 256K for sector size > 512 bytes).

...

Have a good day !

Haajee

You can all crucify me for it, but I miss the old days when you clicked the mouse and expected the machine to obey, and obey immediately, not like these days when you click the mouse, and wonder: will the machine obey? and if so, when will it obey?

Amen, Brother, AMEN!

Ken Leigh

Regards

Go for a snack. On return you will see the machine welcoming you to give another command.

Have a good day !

How do you think I got so fat ?

Does anyone remember Windows 1.0 ?

.

It was 1985. Twenty-four years ago. Time flies, and life is too short.

Regards.

Was it not rrun on 8" Floppy.

I had not worked on it but listened about it.

A computer cost at that time was more than a dwelling house.

Common man had not access to it for a view even.

No, It either used 5.25, or later (1987~8) 3.5. In those days you could freely copy an operating system from one disk format to another. In Israel there was a kind of competition between two GUI (mouse-based platform) systems, both ran on DOS: it was Windows 1.0 and another one, a third-party called "Earthworks" (I still have it, and the version I have will run under DOS-5, and DOS-6. It is black and white, even if you have color, but it will run programs in color.

Windows 1 and Windows 2, were pretty much similar looking, much like a primitive DOS graphics, but when Windows 3.0 emerged in 1990~91, it was a radical departure in looks, feel and features.

It is important to note that when Windows 3 emerged, IBM's OS2-Warp was already out, with far better operating system in all accounts. Some people said later in the mid nineties, that Windows-95 was an exact copy of OS2, and some of those who remember the system (from 1988 ~ 89) said it was far better than Windows 95 - meaning to say that Windows 95 was not even a good copy...

Windows tried to change this criticism of repeatedly copying IBM's Operating system (from Early DOS and on) by developing it's first original kernel, suited-up with Windows graphics - the NT.

The first NT kernel, ran with Windows 3 graphics, but unlike Windows 3x, which ran on DOS-6x kernel, it was fully integrated. In Windows 3x you could descend from Windows to DOS (as a matter of fact you sometimes had to, if you wanted to play some DOS games which wouldn't run on Windows) and back.

- Windows NT-3.1

Ahhh... Those were the days