Windows 3.0: 8088's last stand
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 чер 2024
- Windows 3.0 was the last major Windows release to make its way to the 8088 platform. While Microsoft maybe viewed it as a way to expand its market share, its suboptimal performance on the decade-old platform led to several problems for the end user, including several hardware and software limitations that proved unable to justify, given the fact that much more capable processors such as the 386 had been on the market for years. A deep dive into the Windows 3.0 experience on 8088 reveals the very problems plaguing end users' potential satisfaction and further reason to "upgrade to 286 or higher."
00:00 86Box intro
00:07 Intro
04:01 PART 1: PC prep & Windows installation
05:47 PART 2: The Windows experience
08:12 PART 3: Third-party software
13:37 EPILOGUE: Windows after 8088
15:11 Credits
Real-time clock setup tutorial: • Real-time clocks in 80...
Windows 3.0 30-year special tutorial video: • How to install Windows...
[Music]
"Spirit of Fire" by Jesse Gallagher
UA-cam Audio Library
"Coastline" by INTL.CMD
RoyaltyFreePlanet
• INTRNLCMD - Coastline ...
"Memory Bank" by AIRGLOW
AIRGLOW / NewRetroWave
• AIRGLOW - Memory Bank
airglow-strat.bandcamp.com/al...
"Ocean Wind" by ANGELUX波
RoyaltyFreePlanet
• ANGELUX波 - Ocean Wind ...
"失望した" by EVA
RoyaltyFreePlanet
• EVA - 失望した [Synthwave]...
"Dark Rage" by CO.AG Music
• Sinister Dark Ambient ...
"Convert congregation" by Blear Moon
secret press / Free Music Archive
secretpress.bandcamp.com/albu...
[Links]
Website -- 86box.net
Twitter -- / 86boxemulator
Discord -- / discord
IRC -- kiwiirc.com/client/irc.ringof...
Patreon -- / 86box
[Downloads]
86Box (source code & binaries) -- github.com/86Box/86Box
86Box Manager -- github.com/86Box/86BoxManager
ROMs -- github.com/86Box/roms
[For all UA-cam/social media inquiries or complaints]
allthings86box@gmail.com - Наука та технологія
I like how the editing just improved right now
I grew up in the mid 90s. People seriously don't understand how much of a boon this software was for all businesses. When I was a toddler I had such an amazing fun time on the family pc to the point I was the resident expert by a young age. I used to tag along with my mom when she went into the office, her coworkers didn't care I never got in the way. Seeing all the adults watch in awe as I just used a spare computer as I normally would kinda blew my mind. Every couple minutes, I'd hear "I didn't know you could do that", "Oh I could do X quicker doing that" so on and so forth. In the couple years I went with her to work, my moms office completely restructured. They used to have a dedicated archive room with sliding shelves etc. They got rid of that quick when they realized they could automate document ingestion. It was wild to see how quickly computers change everything. It happened in between generations so its a hard thing to talk about and discuss as things changed so quickly people have extremely varying perspectives of it.
I always wondered if my 8088 could support any Windows. The fact that it supported up to 3.0 is remarkable, and I’m glad we never thought to try it.
12:29 Excel 3.0 was the first Microsoft program to require 80286 processor and subsequently Windows running in standard or enhanced mode.
t h e f l o o r i s m a d e o u t o f f l o o r
EGA and VGA drivers will work on an XT with a NEC V20 or V30 processor since those CPUs have the 80186/real mode 80286 instructions. It would be interesting to see if any of the hanging applications would work on those processors.
unfortunately, 86Box doesn't currently emulates the NEC V20 or V20 CPUs at all.
I heard you can also copy the drivers from Windows 2 and that may work on 3.0.
@@danaeckel5523 this schould work. I'll try this at the upcoming weekend. 😉
@@msdosm4nfred Did it work?
@@msdosm4nfred 86Box just added NEC CPU's now :-)
Now do Windows 3.1: 286's last stand
Then windows 95: 386's last stand
Then Windows 98 and 2000: 486's last stand
Then Windows XP, Vista and 7: Pentium's last stand
And last... Windows 8.1 and 10: Pentium 4's last stand.
you forgot windows 11: pre-2017/18 cpus' last stand
@HoloKola u'll have to sign a waiver that blocks u from updates tho so basically yea but not rlly
We don't emulate Pentium 4s, and probably never will. Windows 8.1 and 10 are out of the question.
98 first edition WILL RUN on a 386 if you fool the installer... I had it going on a 386DX-25 w/ 8mb memory! It's far worse than 3.0 on an 8088: overnight install and 6+ minutes to boot up XD
I think Windows Vista should be for Pentium II's last stand and Windows 7 for Pentium III's last stand.
This is fantastically well made! Thirsty of seeing more of these :0
My first CPU was a 286 of 12/6 MHz, running MS-DOS.
I still have the machine, and it even still booted a few years ago - but some error about the (40 Mb) harddrive popped up.
Oh I love your aesthetic, this is such a well made video and really enjoyable style; stands out from the rest!
Liked, subscribed, and looking forward to more 🙂
Thank you so much for the kind words! -DDX
You are a champ at documentary-style videos.
Great video! I also had wished that Windows 3.x kept supporting XTs a bit longer, like PC GEOS did.
Though, I'd like to add that there also were good technical considerations for dropping 8086 support.
For once, Windows 3.x greatly grew in size over time and the RAM available in Real-Mode was running out already.
Something large as MS Works or Office would never fit in there, except if overlay files were used (slow).
Sure, this could have been circumvented by using EMS, which Windows 3.0's Real-Mode kernal had supported.
But only a few XT users had physical EMS boards installed. 286 motherboards (those NEAT chipsets)
had sometimes EMS in chipset, but they're supported by Windows 3.0 Standard-Mode kernal, anyway.
Secondly, newer API features like drag&drop, OLE, DDE and the multimedia APIs were supported by
Standard-Mode kernal and 386 Enhanced-Mode kernal, but not the Windows 3.0 Real-Mode kernal (not completely).
So applications needing them couldn't run, even if they were purely written in 8086 code.
That's why Windows 3.0a with Multimedia Extensions had dropped Real-Mode support earlier on, already.
In wordprocessors like MS Word, you need to be able embed audio files and pictures, too, at some point.
Lastly, there's another factor. Windows 3.0 Real Mode kernal was made with maximum backwards compatibiliy in mind.
The main purpose was to keep older applications from the Windows 1.x/2.x days running fine.
This even included older device drivers from Windows 2.x, which could still work on Windows 3.0 in Real-Mode.
I mean, what were people already using when Windows 3.0 debuted? Their Windows /386 applications, of course.
While well-behaved Windows 1.x/2.x applications do also run in Standard-Mode/Enhanced-Mode, not all do.
There are a few which fiddle with DOS and memory addresses and won't work in Protected-Mode of a 286/386.
Maybe that's another consideration as to why MS decided to drop Real-Mode support.
They wanted to break free from the Windows 1.x/2.x legacy and the burden to support it.
23 minutes is really NOT bad… try installing Windows on ANYTHING back the and it was a 30 to 1 hour process especially when we started dealing with 40-250GB hard drives and still relied on FAT12/16/32. NTFS was faster and you only saw it in Windows NT before Windows 2000 and neither were exactly geared toward regular consumers.
Windows 2000 is Windows NT.
@4:10 Format is a lot faster if you use /q
There's no reason to not do a quick format on a virtual disk, there's not going to be any physically bad sectors.
You cannot quickly format a disk that was never formatted before.
Great video. You hinted at the end but I’d like to see how windows 3.1 was usable on IBM AT platform as well.
It actually looks really good through Hercules mono tbh
23 minutes is too long?
In Russia 90's we spended 30-60 minutes while install Windows 95 on 386.
(Sorry for my bad english)
I remember my dad installing Windows 98 on customer computers when my family had a computer repair business and it usually took anywhere between 17 to 35 minutes depending on how slow the system is.
I was installing Windows 98 SE on my 486DX2 + 12MB RAM many times when i was a kid. It took about 90 minutes, maybe even more. Hi from Russia.
We're facing that binary choice now: in a couple years it'll come to either sticking with Windows and be forced to purchase hardware that supports 11 or ditching Windows and start becoming cozy with Linux. This time it's different from 3 decades ago: internet security necessitates software upgrades but (for home users at least) only advanced game features necessitate hardware upgrades. Just like in 1990 the need to support 16-bit had fallen by the wayside today there's no need to continue supporting 32-bit, but other than that I don't appreciate Microsoft going back on the original plan to make Windows 10 the last version with indefinite support (it's not as if they've had a revenue model centered around Windows since about 1992).
It seems to take quite a while, but looking back we are too used to new and faster technology. Back in the day 23 minutes would be long but still very doable. I do remember that when Windows 95 and 98 came out, for the aging systems we installed it on, the wizard would also prompt similar times. It wasn't great, but we made due with what we had. I remember gaming Duke1 on a small monochrome portable with terrible screen lag at 2am in the morning. But we still had a blast.
Can't believe Im worry about 8088 at 2021 lol...just found 7 of those 1978 models
At the time, I was looking for a Windows-like program for the Photo Portrait studio's IBM XT, which I'd upgraded as far as I could. PC/Geos, then marketed as GeoWorks Ensemble, looked like a possibility. With 5.25" floppies in hand, I installed this not-Windows OS and was satisfied. The widely-spaced size of scalable fonts made word processing a joy, even for version 1.0. I upgraded to GeoWorks Ensemble 1.2 and explored color printing with a Citizen GX "rainbow ribbon" printer. Windows 3.1 and Truetype fonts finally made me put Ye Olde IBM XT in favor of my somewhat better 80386DX desktop computer.
I've had Windows 3.0, 3.1, 3.11 NT & 3.51 NT.
.
I still have the install disc for all of these.
Windows 3.51 NT was released only a few months before Windows 95, so is mostly overshadowed and forgotten. It had additional features for server control.
Any improvement with a Math Co-processor?
I am installing Windows 3.0 on an IBM 5160 (8088 CPU). After beginning to install the files, the screen went black with a flashing cursor at the top. I will leave it for awhile and hope something pops up on the screen.
Actually the Video 7 VGA 1024i and it's driver also works on windows 3.0 on 8088 and can get even 256 colors
I like this video
I wonder how much performance would increase if you had expanded memory installed.
512kb should be enough for everyone!
I had Windows 3.1 running on my Acer AnyWare 1100LX 386SX VGA laptop with a monochrome screen and it looked much better, offering 16 shades of grey in 640x480. Was enough to tell the difference between the suits. Monochrome isn't necessarily 1-bit black and white.
(Even with 4MB of RAM installed, I wasn't able to get Enhanced Mode to work - perhaps the processor wasn't fast enough. But Standard Mode worked fine.)
Prolly also had something to do with the memory amount.
would Minesweeper work?
Linux version:
Kernel 3.7: 386's last stand
Kernel 6.1: 486's last stand (Still Active)
Wow, all these features AND reversi? The excitable bald man did not lie.
6:16 8088/86 support was dropped after Windows 3.10.026, and real mode wasn't a thing after 3.10.061d.
Lol 23 minutes? It might just be because I was a kid at the time with less patience, but I just remember computers being SLOOOOOOOW back then to do anything. I think retro enthusiasts who work with them now get the best hardware that was available which would have been out of most peoples’ price range, and they do everything under ideal conditions with the internet at their fingertips or hell, now even AI chatbots you can just ask in plain English, ready to troubleshoot even the most obscure problems.
But back then you were just kind of on your own with what you had at hand and everything was such a pain in the ass to get working. There was a 386 that moved to my room once the family computer got upgraded and there was some sort of a problem where you had to set up the hardware configuration or something every time it was powered off for some reason, and my dad forgot how to do it, so I just had a big noisy brick in my room until I could figure out how to get it up and running after trial and error with little to no hardware or software knowledge at the time
Honestly between hercules and CGA Monocrome? I'd take hercules.
Entirely off topic but...
My emulated machine has completely stopped detecting any floppy disk.
It seems pretty usable to me
When it works of course
I agree this is well made.
Still, I’m a bit sad that people call taipei/mahjong solitaire just mahjong. Always made it harder to find actual mahjong games. ;_;
real mode was dropped in windows 3.1 (with or without workgroups)
How funny - at 3:07, I was reading 4.77 GHz for a second and going "huh?". *lol*
Oh, if only.
Is it me or Window early history in 1980 has been somewhat convoluted and delayed...I had a MS DOS running the Windows 3.1 Desktop Manager in College level Student Physic Computer Lab.... The competitor was Norton Desktop than Geoworks. Got to love it been "Slow." If you are student and getting paid below minimum wage per hour and have a job as typist on IBM electric typewriter...., not slow; you multi task.
And I thought Windows 10 on Pentium 4 was slow…
Windows 3.1 is the last to support 286.
hmm yes
the floor is made out of floor
@NT Small Business Server Networking features in WfW 3.1 require 386.
This doesn't change the fact that Windows for Workgroups 3.11 would require a 386 to function optimally, hence us going with a 486 (well past minimum requirements) for our WfW 3.11 video.
@@86Box test a old linux distro like slackware 1.20 on a emulated 386 and trident 8900b for a video someday
80386 had a longer life for being 32bits.
Voice reveal
yup. that was all me.
@@DDXofficial can you do more videos
@@leap123_ when i have the time.
i like when you talk if i wanted to read i wouldn't be on YOU TUBE!
Basically, the i386 when fully featured with an MMU and a FPU was the first Intel PC setup that was an actual real computer and not some kludged up half manufacture around a CPU family, that was originally intended to offer the simplest feature set for the most basic microcontroller applications such as a minimalist PLC for running a set of traffic lights. In essence, a chipset that was a single set forward from an IC with a 555 and a couple of logic gate arrays. In short, a system considered to be a solidstate solution to replace mechanical relay based automation.
And I can see why most people in larger established companies in the computer industry considered Gates and Allen both insane and idiotic with their release of Microsoft's first software product, the Altair BASIC which they very quickly started to market to all equivocal systems based around similar CPUs as the Microsoft basic. Same for Digital Research for making CP/M for the 8080.
The idea you won't even bother with an MMU or an FPU much less a CPU that understands at all the concept of memory areas or where it loads and runs shit, so that, neither does the OS is brain dead level stupid. For one if you're not careful when programming for such a thing, you're easily gonna give users a bad day with lost work and weird malfunctions.
And some cursed that the fact that this kind of bullshit is selling as well as it does, will be a problem in the future and that these kludgy clusterfucks do not deserve to be called "computers", personal or otherwise. :D
As a kid totally happy with my C64 I could not understand such mean and undeserved comments about my beloved system from adults.
Today, I can say with an honest heart; They (My electrical engineer and research scientist father and his colleagues) were correct and this was total bullshit. :D
Basically, finally you could run a multiuser OS that can do proper parallel multiprocessing and resources scheduling with a Intel-based PC. Technically, the i286 with appropriate set of auxiliary chips could do this as well. And the Xenix 286 which was a licensed port of the AT&T Unix code and a resent set, no less (Originally from Microsoft! Which was the biggest UNIX software company at the time.) was the first proper OS to boot Multiuser on a "IBM PC compatible" system with a Intel CPU in it.
But, when that thing has the mind shattering memory addressing capacity of a grand total of 2MB you're not gonna do very much multiuser or multiprocessing anything on it.
No matter how small the codebase was at the time. Technically that is equivocal to the DEC PDP-11 the system got its start on, but by the mid-1980's was completely replaced by former customer base with the DEC VAX and companies like Sun Microsystems and SGi were selling machines with tens or even hundreds of megabytes of RAM in them.
And Electrical Engineering campuses were ordering hundreds of machines on a yearly basis. The 286 was a joke. But, the i386 was serious enough a contender that even Sun had a go at selling machine based on it. With out the BIOS or ability to boot anything but Sun's own SunOS on them. The IBM PC / DOS compatibility was done with the help of a software suite, if one wanted to contaminate the OS which such nonsense.
Used the ISA bus also. Strangely enough.
And it was popular for the short period of time it was available, they even made a second gen model around the i486 but only a couple of prototypes were ever delivered to certain key customers. (Naturally Unis. with EE and SE depts.)
Microsofts dominance and insistence on keeping things "backwards compatible" or rather, the majority of 32bit Intel systems running in Legacy mode and shooting them in the knee for over a decade, is a bit infuriating.
Fortunately intel and amd have had the where with all to kill backwards compatible modes on their chips finally. Would be abit insane to boot a damn 128 core and 256 thread Ryzen into 8080-mode :D
505 subs!
Geeesssuusss capabilities vs expectations.
Yeh sure we have all become accustomed to power rich cpus that makes us all gluttens for an unending fill of software that keeps us suckling on our mummys tit.
I love the 8088 it has an interesting history, hell look up the Xerox ALTO and the apollo guidance computer the pioneering list goes on.
The compact nature of programming back then was amazing what we could do with limited memory.
We have lost something these days.
May its some go dam humility and respect for where this shit came from.
I love going retro its soo much fun compared to the current bloat of software multimedia horseshit we are being spoon fed these days.
Yay im leaving now
686 subs!
8088 was a great machine introducing me to DOS but you sound like you hated the machine and would more than use degrading words
One of the things people for the sake of entertainment(TM).
Yes it was fine in the early 80s as a cut-down 8086- but it was little more than a glorified calculator. By 1990, you really needed at least a 286 and preferably a CPU with some 32 bit features.
a glorified calculator would be something like the casio 770p which had 1.5k memory after upgrading. It could do basic program. from there I moved to zx spectrum 128K which was a whole computer in itself boasting any application that one could nedd like office, games, home business and tons of software available. Then you upgraded to IBM PC which was proffessional business machine. I am afraid youre too yound to witness computer glory as it progressess.@@anonUK
Bill may have said 640K ought to be enough for anybody, but he never said anything about the CPU.
23 minutes installation? Nothing. It would be normal if not fast on a period correct 98 machine. A 386/16 would OTOH require 3 hours for a 98 installation. 40 minutes of just scanning devices...
Edit: so it's emulated. Lmao. No wonder stuff don't work...
what the fuck is this dj deedahx
sup