VOGONS


First post, by Xeo

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I've got all three OSes and I got my DOS/Win3.11 setup just about flawless. For the sake of DOS/Win3.1 gaming are there any advantages with running Win98 instead?

Reply 1 of 26, by RobertJ

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I wouldn't say there are any advantages, but there aren't many disadvantages either. If you run Win98, it's very easy to dual boot into DOS (7.1 or even 6.22). If you're running Win98 then obviously you can't take advantage of the library that supports Windows exclusively, but I get that's outside the realm of your question but IMHO something to consider.

If you want to keep it as simple as possible stick with DOS.

8-bit Collection: 4 64Cs, 6 1541-IIs, 1 C128, 2 1571s, 1 C128DCR
Vintage DOS: Dell Optiplex G1, ATI Rage IIC, Sound Blaster CT4520, Thrustmaster FCS Mark II, Gravis PC GamePad
Monitor: Dell 20" 2007FPb

Reply 2 of 26, by jheronimus

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I keep Windows 3.11 for networking (FTP via Total Commander) on my lower-specced builds (486, P60). I don't think there's any "gaming" benefit in Win 3.11 — it's just a way to have some Windows functionality on an otherwise pure DOS machine.

MR BIOS catalog
Unicore catalog

Reply 3 of 26, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Re: Uses for Each Windows
^As I said, maybe that just was a palette issue or a drivers issue in 98SE.

If my memory serves, old QuickTime (16-Bit) was required for certain games,
but didn't work so well (stability issues) in Win95.

Last, but not least, there were some GDi glitches with old games on Win95.

WinTrek, for example.
Note the font of the messages and SRS panel and the icons.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 4 of 26, by Azarien

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Those icons vs rolled up windows reflect a global change in Windows 95 support for MDI applications. The same thing happened in Program Manager (which is still present in Windows 95 but sucks for this very reason), Word 6 and many others. But I am suprised that there were games using the same API.

Reply 6 of 26, by Stiletto

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Moved.

"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen

Stiletto

Reply 7 of 26, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

WinTrek and icon novelty programs (Tiny Elvis, Mouse Power, etc) is all I can think of - and maybe some really fussy install programs that rely on utils only in DOS and not in Win95's little dos *cough*Software Toolworks*cough*

real talk though, I haven't had a pure DOS machine since 1996. I never looked back, even in my 486 rebuild a decade back. I didn't feel like I was missing out or being disadvantaged all that time.

apsosig.png
long live PCem

Reply 8 of 26, by dr_st

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I'd say that Win98 gives you the following advantages:

  1. Better networking support (More supported NICs including WiFi, easier file sharing, better internet compatibility)
  2. FAT32 support which removes 2GB partition and 7.something GB total hard drive limit
  3. Some games and some sound cards actually perform better from within Windows 98 rather than in pure DOS due to better audio drivers

https://cloakedthargoid.wordpress.com/ - Random content on hardware, software, games and toys

Reply 9 of 26, by squiggly

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
dr_st wrote:
I'd say that Win98 gives you the following advantages: […]
Show full quote

I'd say that Win98 gives you the following advantages:

  1. Better networking support (More supported NICs including WiFi, easier file sharing, better internet compatibility)
  2. FAT32 support which removes 2GB partition and 7.something GB total hard drive limit
  3. Some games and some sound cards actually perform better from within Windows 98 rather than in pure DOS due to better audio drivers

Isn't there a nice CD that has an easy way to install DOS6.22 and then Win3.11 if you so choose? I would like to get a hold of that.

Reply 10 of 26, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

No. Those are floppy installs only.

apsosig.png
long live PCem

Reply 11 of 26, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I seond that. If you're lucky, then there's a separate OEM CD-ROM release of DOS 6.22 and WfW 3.11 each.
For WfW 3.11, there's at least one in existemce (I own such a disc).

However, there's no advantage over the floppy release.
Well, except for some optional ISDN package; I believe (have to check).

If you wish, you can make such a CD yourself quite easily:
Just copy the content of your floppies into a directory named "WIN311" (any other name will do, as well) or into root.

I have no information about a bootable DOS 6.22 disc, sorry.
I believe you can make one yourself, though.

Or use the FreeDOS disc, or the Win98 CD-ROM and use DOS 7.1:
Some utilities are on the emulated floppy drive, other are in D:\WIN98 or D:\WIN98\COMMAND (D:\ = your CD-ROM drive).

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 12 of 26, by squiggly

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Jo22 wrote:

However, there's no advantage over the floppy release.

How about not needing a floppy drive to install it in the first place?

Reply 13 of 26, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
squiggly wrote:

How about not needing a floppy drive to install it in the first place?

I don't know, I've never had been without one. What i meant to say :
In terms of features, unlike Win95 CD-ROM vs Win95 floppy release, there's no advantage in my CD-ROM version of WfW.
It contains the same files as the floppy version.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 14 of 26, by Errius

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

How does booting into DOS from CD work anyway? Aren't there driver issues to sort out, since DOS doesn't have native optical drive support?

Is this too much voodoo?

Reply 15 of 26, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

It depends. Originally, a bootable CD-ROM contains a "hidden" image of a 1.44MB floppy.
The BIOS of a Pentium era PC would include a rudimentary IDE/ATAPI CD-ROM support and boot that image from CD-ROM.
Just like it would from a floppy. At this point, some of the DOS drivers (if any) would take over and make the drive available.

The Win98SE CD, for example, works that way. It contains drivers such as oakcdrom.sys, SCSi drivers,
and mscdex.exe. It also contains a RAM disk driver, I think.

FreeDOS (?) and other systems may use an hard disk emulation, instead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Torito ... _standard)

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 16 of 26, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Jo22 wrote:

The Win98SE CD, for example, works that way.

The OEM CDs only of course. But even those OEM cds that do provide a DOS/Win3 install you're still expected to boot from a floppy to access them sine that's all pre-El Torito era.

apsosig.png
long live PCem

Reply 17 of 26, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

You're right, I guess. It's been a while since I held a retail copy in my hands.
As far as 98SE is concerned, I'm used to the more common OEM releases.
They were also sold (second-hand) with Microsoft manual, COA certificate, et.c

Likely. Back in the 2000s (?) I heard that a collegue of my father claimed to have a DOS 6.22 CD.
This makes me wonder how long the DOS6.22/WfW3.11 bundle was actually available.

Especially the OEM releases. Best I found was an entry for QB 4.5. The 88/89 release ended ts life in 1999.
If DOS6.22/WFW3.11 were support as long as that, support would have had ended in 2004,
several years after El Torito was introduced. Anyway, not sure about it. 😕

In comparison to other Windows releases (excluding XP) WfW had a long life.
It ended in 2008, because of several reasons.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 19 of 26, by Dhigan

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Late answer ... FAT16 formated HDD is the key.

Win 3.1 : HP Omnibook 425 + Toshiba T2130CT
Win 9x : Dell Latitude Cpx H500GT + Dell GX1
Win XP64 : Asus P5B Xeon