AFAICR windows <95 modem support was just an ini file with the init string and specified any non-hayes off hook commands etc. So yah, basically just useful in terminal, not sure RAS was a thing yet. Maybe appeared in WFWG for login to NT domains.

I would have thought a hardware serial modem didn't need any 'drivers' per se, regardless of OS...

VivienM wrote on 2023-11-05, 02:13:

I would have thought a hardware serial modem didn't need any 'drivers' per se, regardless of OS...

Maybe a reference to getting the FIFO enabled on the 16550A since it's a "high speed" modem but I bet that is overthinking it...

They could as well advertise it as compatible with Windows 1.x, as the Terminal app has been a part of Windows from the very beginning...

but...

there is some possibility that the bundled software actually includes a version for Windows 2.x.
Very unlikely - seriously, hardly anybody cared about Windows 2.x even in its era, leave alone in the era of Windows 95 - but not completely impossible.

VivienM wrote on 2023-11-05, 02:13:

I would have thought a hardware serial modem didn't need any 'drivers' per se, regardless of OS...

Does the Fax side of things require drivers or is that also just standard commands?

bobconan wrote on 2023-11-05, 04:43:

Does the Fax side of things require drivers or is that also just standard commands?

You use a couple of AT commands (now standardized, who knows at the time...) to select the common fax modulations and headers, then - just like a modem in normal data mode is really a serial port extender - you pump in the pre-encoded image to send (in a standard fax codec, not plain TIFF as Microsoft Fax saves 😀 )

Look at page 6 of https://www.multitech.com/documents/publicati … als/s000239.pdf for what goes on!

Grzyb wrote on 2023-11-05, 02:30:

They could as well advertise it as compatible with Windows 1.x, as the Terminal app has been a part of Windows from the very beg […]
Show full quote

They could as well advertise it as compatible with Windows 1.x, as the Terminal app has been a part of Windows from the very beginning...

but...

there is some possibility that the bundled software actually includes a version for Windows 2.x.
Very unlikely - seriously, hardly anybody cared about Windows 2.x even in its era, leave alone in the era of Windows 95 - but not completely impossible.

I think the same, it might be related to the software compatibility.

Speaking of Windows 2.x.. It's difficult, I think.
- I guess most user here know about my point-of-view of Windows 2 already. 😅

Personally, I think that there's sort of a missing link when it comes to Windows 2.x (including Windows/386).

I think there once was a notable amount of lesser known Windows 2 software in the late 80s that got washed away by the upcoming super hit, Windows 3.0!

There was a "silent majority" of Windows 2 applications that got overwritten (wiped out) by their Windows 3 re-compilations, essentially.

That's why they're lost in time and nobody ever remembers them anymore.
Problem is, Windows 2 was widely used, but wasn't mainstream yet.
People had not developed an emotional bond to it, there's little nostalgia.

One of those forgotten applications was "Fenestra", a BTX-Decoder program for Windows 2.
It was a telecommunications program to access BTX online service.

The first screenshots seen were taken on Windows 2, still.
But once released, it was aimed at Windows 3.0 quickly.

Source: https://forum.classic-computing.de/forum/inde … tware-fenestra/

Edit: If I had to make a bet, I'd say it's the bundled "COMit" software ("for DOS and Windows"). Its logo looks most dated.

The fax software is also a possibility, of course. But it takes up more memory, which can be taxing to Windows 2 without EMS.
But then.. There's also GeoFAX on C64..

Edit: No, I think I was heavy on the wood way here. 😅
Just double-checked. WinFax Lite seems to be from 1992, whereas COMit for Windows was from 1995. Ouch! Picture attached.

Edit: Typos fixed.

I bought the modem out of sheer curiosity.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-11-05, 10:17:

I think the same, it might be related to the software compatibility. […]
Show full quote

I think the same, it might be related to the software compatibility.

Speaking of Windows 2.x.. It's difficult, I think.
- I guess most user here know about my point-of-view of Windows 2 already. 😅

Personally, I think that there's sort of a missing link when it comes to Windows 2.x (including Windows/386).

I think there once was a notable amount of lesser known Windows 2 software in the late 80s that got washed away by the upcoming super hit, Windows 3.0!

There was a "silent majority" of Windows 2 applications that got overwritten (wiped out) by their Windows 3 re-compilations, essentially.

I've actually had the feeling that was the case. It seems like there should be MUCH more software for it than what is listed on toastytech.

bobconan wrote on 2023-11-05, 11:37:

I've actually had the feeling that was the case. It seems like there should be MUCH more software for it than what is listed on toastytech.

That seems to be the case, indeed.
Sometimes, PCs running Windows 1.x and 2.x can be seen in TV shows of the 1980s.

Like this one, here, for example.: MS-Windows (1980s) in films and series

That being said, I wrote the site owner a few mails in the past years, discussing Windows 1&2 a little bit.
He knows a lot about these things (-has ported Minesweeper, too-), I think and is still looking out for such Windows applications.

_
The problem with Windows 1.x/2.x may also be that Windows was very young back then.

Users simply called it "MS Windows", because it had no real history at hand at this point.

But searching for a plain "MS Windows" application without the corresponding version number is almost impossible these days.

Some users back then may even have called Windows the "Presentation Manager", also.
That was the original name, which OS/2 later on had taken possession of.

And due to the visual similarity, users may have forgotten about the old Windows applications they had used at work place.
OS/2 1.1 looked essentially the same, after all.

These are all just possible explanations, of course. It's hard to get hold on proofs these days.

However, I'm still positive that it's possible to dig up some more old applications.
There must be backups left. On old cover disks of PC magazines, on old HDDs in XTs on someone's attic. Original shrink-wrapped disks in someone's garage etc. There's still hope. 🙂

I'm under impression that there's more interest in Windows 1.x/2.x today, then back in the era.

Yes, early Windowses could be seen in some TV shows, as they were naturally more spectacular than pure DOS.
But in the real world, Windows didn't exist!

All the major PC apps were for DOS: Word Star, Word Perfect, Lotus 1-2-3, Quattro, dBase, AutoCAD... and note that there's no Microsoft's products on this list!
Windows 3.0, however, was finally a success, and there was suddenly demand for Windows apps - but at that moment, the only notable vendor of such apps was Microsoft, hence their later monopoly...

Grzyb wrote on 2023-11-05, 13:27:

All the major PC apps were for DOS: Word Star, Word Perfect, Lotus 1-2-3, Quattro, dBase, AutoCAD... and note that there's no Microsoft's products on this list!
Windows 3.0, however, was finally a success, and there was suddenly demand for Windows apps - but at that moment, the only notable vendor of such apps was Microsoft, hence their later monopoly...

Many people forget that Microsoft's productivity apps were originally more popular on the Mac, perhaps in part because people with very established text-mode apps (like WordPerfect, Lotus, etc) weren't really embracing the Mac's GUI paradigm. (While Wikipedia claims there was WordPerfect for Mac starting in 1988, my sense was always that you had MacWrite, MS Word, and some small Mac-only players like WriteNow and later Nisus. WordPerfect actually had a good Mac version in the mid-1990s right when Microsoft didn't, but I digress...) By the late 1980s, Word/Excel for Mac had established themselves as dominant... and that GUI experience on the Mac positioned Microsoft well for GUI apps on Windows while, say, WordPerfect botched the transition with disastrous releases like 5.1/5.2 for Windows.

Also, I believe that Windows 2.x was available as a bundled runtime version and some early people selling GUI software for the PC/DOS/Windows platform, e.g. Corel, shipped their first versions that way...

Grzyb wrote on 2023-11-05, 13:27:

I'm under impression that there's more interest in Windows 1.x/2.x today, then back in the era.

Maybe? 😉

Here's another forgotten Windows 2.x application, Voyetra M/pc.

Edit: Here's the advertisement for the software, too.

VivienM wrote on 2023-11-05, 14:36:

Also, I believe that Windows 2.x was available as a bundled runtime version and some early people selling GUI software for the PC/DOS/Windows platform, e.g. Corel, shipped their first versions that way...

Yes, I think that's true. I can think of two programs, at least.
Older releases of Balance of Power had shipped with Windows 1 and 2, whereas PageMaker 3 shipped with a runtime of Windows 2.

There might be more of them. Paint programs, OCR scanner software, databases, Microsoft software (WinWord, Excel) etc..

The very last runtime versions were based on Windows 3.0, maybe.
There was that Test Drive release, I remember. It was more of a demo, though.