rkurbatov wrote on 2024-01-17, 00:32:
This is very good topic, I think something like this (or like, you know Wikipedia stripes for rock bands) would be very helpful to get period correct memo. So you could choose among different options - like totaly fresh stuff, dying technology, typical, pro, time paradox 😀 Lots of things existed simultaneously with absolute crazy period of 1996-2003. In 1995 you still could buy 386 (or even worse). And even use it for lots of applications. In 2000 your Pentium 133-166 was meh.
Hi there! Well said, I think.
The 386/486 PCs were around for the whole 90s, as far as I can remember.
Shareware CDs had specs like a 486DX33, MS-DOS 5, 4MB, SVGA, Sound Blaster
In the years ~1993 to 2000, my dad had a 386DX-40 PC with 16 MB RAM and a 150 KB single-speed CD-ROM drive (Lu005S).
Two hard disks were installed, one for Win95 and applications, the second one for data.
He also had an internal Towitoko chip card reader (smartcard reader), an Epson (?) color ink printer, an 33k6 modem and a DCF-77 radio receiver.
Monitor was a 20" single-frequency type, I believe (switching between 800x600 and 640x480 required manual adjustment).
With this thing he surfed the world wide web (Netscape 2), did home banking, visited CompuServe,
did write his invoices, printed his business cards, did his programming work (VB, Delphi, etc)..
In short, it was a solid business PC for development and paper works.
Other users had higher specced PCs (486DX, 486DX2, 486DX4, CX586, Pentium etc),
but maybe less memory, a smaller CRT or no modem. The 90s were full of diversity.
For example, the Amstrad Mega PC was totally underpowered at the time.
386SX, 1MB, 256KB VGA RAM, no CD-ROM drive, no modem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amstrad_Mega_PC
In short, it wasn't very up-to-date for its time.
Such systems weren't too uncommon, though.
Notebook users usually had to struggle with memory limitations, too.
Some users tried to run Windows 95 on a model with 4 MB of RAM.
That was because the hardware was made with Windows 3.1x in mind, still.
On the other hand, there were video game fans and multimedia fans who didn't want anything less than a 486DX2-66 with a double-speed drive and a VLB graphics card and a VLB IDE host adapter.
Virtual Reality also was a factor in the mid-90s.
I still remember the ads for Forte VFX-1 or CyberBoy in those Pearl Agency magazines..
Here, owning a Pentium 120 was no waste. It was more of a minimum requirement, rather.
Due to the use of alternating fields, twice the work had to be done in order to keep the same effective resolution.
Astronomy fans had a need for a fast 486 (no SX please!), too.
Simulating the night sky was quite resource heavy. I still remember SkyGlobe.
The fans of "Ballerspiele" (shooter) couldn't get enough raw power, either.
That's were Pentium systems were about good enough. Pentium MMX and II were preferred, though.
Most full VGA titles with 640x480 (RPGs, Visual Novels) did want a quick 386/486.
No matter if it was early or late 90s.
In my place, the localized release of Knights of Xentar with new voice acting was released in the late 90s on CD.
It needed a 386SX-16 with 4MB of RAM, DOS 5 and a 2x CD-ROM drive to run (crawl).
A fast 486 was very welcome anytime, though.
Similarly, Seasons of the Sakura (DOS), which was freshly released about same time, asked for a 486, too.
Another reverse extreme was the Windows 3.0 game "TRACON". A 1991 simulation about the work of an air traffic controller.
It recommended to get a 486DX33 PC with 4 MB of RAM or more and an 20" SVGA monitor.
A Super VGA card with 800x600 or better yet, 1024x768 was recommended.
A Sound Blaster, too, to hear simulated radio communications between tower/atc and pilots.
This was being done before Windows had an official audio support, even!
Creative's own Sound Blaster SDK for Windows was being used here. The game was linked against a Sound Blaster DLL.
And all this in 1991, when many here still had an Amiga 500 or IBM XT with Hercules or CGA graphics.. Amazing. 🤯
PS: The site dosdays has a excellent overview of the individual years.
https://www.dosdays.co.uk/topics/typical_pc_per_year.php
It also covers so called "clearance PCs", which were sold off for cheap.
Users of little money or humble needs (kids, students, home users etc) did buy them, despite being obsolete.
That's why shareware/freeware scene was still holding onto lower minimum specs, I believe.
Here, private users weren't just consumers, but also authors.
Edit: I think that the years 98/99 might be a special case.
Because, the release of Windows 98 marked the very end of the 16-Bit era.
Windows 95, by contrast, still did feature a 16-Bit legacy.
Development tools of the late 16-Bit era still got to know Windows 95 (Win95 awareness).
In the days of Windows 95, Visual Basic 3 and Delphi 1, old Fox Pro etc were still being used to develop new 16-Bit applications meant for use under Windows 95.
So 98/99 strictly didn't belong to the 90s anymore, maybe.
They might have been already in the 2000s, technology wise. Like Windows 98SE.