4xtx wrote on 2021-04-04, 11:08:

Cool well hope it can serve some purpose for you :-) […]
Show full quote

radiance32 wrote on 2021-04-03, 05:54:

That's it, got it! ;) Maybe there was some temporary issue??? […]
Show full quote

4xtx wrote on 2021-04-03, 00:28:

Weird - that's my personal server (hosted in Australia).. anyway I uploaded it to a random sharing service hope it works: https://gofile.io/d/r2WOoN

That's it, got it! 😉
Maybe there was some temporary issue???

Anyways,
I have a busy dayjob, so it's gonna take me some time to go through all this...
BTW, where did you get the time to do all this (the 2 documents that test all the games and show the screenshots, must have taken you weeks to test all that!)

Cheers,
Terrence

Cool well hope it can serve some purpose for you 😀

This project started around August 2020 and the first 3 revisions of this list are extracted from some of that work plus some "new" testing.
I can't recall how long it's taken to get the list to this state as initially I faded in and out of testing over a few months - the spreadsheet/screenshot document was only a week or so, nothing major..

I also have a busy day (and sometimes night) job and am constantly distracted with other projects so not sure when I'll continue updating my list but if I do I'll check back in here.

I really don't have the time to add hundreds of entries to the first post in this thread,
eg, the "big" list of windows 3.0 real mode 8086 compatible apps,
so i might just add your entire archive and a link to download the documents you've created (eg, the spreadsheets with all the compatibility tests, and the screenshots document)
is that ok with you ?

Terrence

radiance32 wrote on 2021-04-04, 20:43:

I really don't have the time to add hundreds of entries to the first post in this thread, eg, the "big" list of windows 3.0 real […]
Show full quote

4xtx wrote on 2021-04-04, 11:08:

Cool well hope it can serve some purpose for you :-) […]
Show full quote

radiance32 wrote on 2021-04-03, 05:54:

That's it, got it! ;) Maybe there was some temporary issue??? […]
Show full quote

That's it, got it! 😉
Maybe there was some temporary issue???

Anyways,
I have a busy dayjob, so it's gonna take me some time to go through all this...
BTW, where did you get the time to do all this (the 2 documents that test all the games and show the screenshots, must have taken you weeks to test all that!)

Cheers,
Terrence

Cool well hope it can serve some purpose for you 😀

This project started around August 2020 and the first 3 revisions of this list are extracted from some of that work plus some "new" testing.
I can't recall how long it's taken to get the list to this state as initially I faded in and out of testing over a few months - the spreadsheet/screenshot document was only a week or so, nothing major..

I also have a busy day (and sometimes night) job and am constantly distracted with other projects so not sure when I'll continue updating my list but if I do I'll check back in here.

I really don't have the time to add hundreds of entries to the first post in this thread,
eg, the "big" list of windows 3.0 real mode 8086 compatible apps,
so i might just add your entire archive and a link to download the documents you've created (eg, the spreadsheets with all the compatibility tests, and the screenshots document)
is that ok with you ?

Terrence

Of course - feel free to use any part of the project for your purpose

This is a fun thread I found. I have been playing around with PCEmu, and have a virtual machine with 8086 16MHZ, Hercules Graphics, and 2MB Expanded ram. I have been playing around with real mode Windows 3.0 looking for software. So Microsoft kept real mode for compatibility with Windows 2. From what it looks like there wasn't much of anything for Windows 2. After using it on a beefed up 8086 system I couldn't imagine it on a 4MHZ PC or 7 MHZ XT lacking ram expansion. I do have a wish list of some sort of sound support, and NEC 2000 network driver.

Hi! I'll try to do some tests on weekend on my PC/XT machine! 😀

danaeckel wrote on 2021-04-14, 20:42:

This is a fun thread I found. I have been playing around with PCEmu, and have a virtual machine with 8086 16MHZ, Hercules Graphics, and 2MB Expanded ram. I have been playing around with real mode Windows 3.0 looking for software. So Microsoft kept real mode for compatibility with Windows 2. From what it looks like there wasn't much of anything for Windows 2. After using it on a beefed up 8086 system I couldn't imagine it on a 4MHZ PC or 7 MHZ XT lacking ram expansion. I do have a wish list of some sort of sound support, and NEC 2000 network driver.

Yes, that's how it looks like.
Unfortunately, we will likely never find out about early Windows titles. 🙁
After Windows 3 was released in 1990, many titles were recompiled for it.
That got rid of compatibility warnings, most importantly.

Now the problem is, that early shareware CDs and FTPs from after 1990 always kept the most recent versions of the time, not version 1.0 of a specific software that previously was made for ancient Windows. 🙁

Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-10, 06:44:

Yes, that's how it looks like. Unfortunately, we will never find out about early Windows titles. After Windows 3 was released […]
Show full quote

danaeckel wrote on 2021-04-14, 20:42:

This is a fun thread I found. I have been playing around with PCEmu, and have a virtual machine with 8086 16MHZ, Hercules Graphics, and 2MB Expanded ram. I have been playing around with real mode Windows 3.0 looking for software. So Microsoft kept real mode for compatibility with Windows 2. From what it looks like there wasn't much of anything for Windows 2. After using it on a beefed up 8086 system I couldn't imagine it on a 4MHZ PC or 7 MHZ XT lacking ram expansion. I do have a wish list of some sort of sound support, and NEC 2000 network driver.

Yes, that's how it looks like.
Unfortunately, we will never find out about early Windows titles.
After Windows 3 was released in 1990, many titles were recompiled for it.
That got rid of compatibility warnings, most importantly.
Now the problem is, that shareware CDs and FTPs always kept the most recent versions, qnot version 1.0 that was made for ancient Windows. 🙁

There weren't many titles at all from MS Windows 1.0 and .x. Ver 2 was used as a run time environment for some applications such as Aldus PageMaker but that was about it. Ver 1 and 2 were never taken seriously at all. Dos was still prefered over those.

Version 3.0 was initially used as a Dos multitasking environment on 386s up while applications started to catch up.

^I disagree a bit. 😀 In the past, I've tracked down quite a few old Win 1.x/2.x shareware/freeware programs from the 80s and early 90s,
some of which can be found at that other guy's GUI gallery page..

More than often, these early programs had been replaced by those of higher version numbers.
In the supplied readme files, these programs mentioned earlier versions I was unable to find anymore.

Edit: Before Windows 3.0, programmers simply linked/compiled their programs against
"The MS Windows API".

There was no real distinction between Windows 1.x and Windows 2.x.

Programmers still used books to learn to write Windows programs.
That's why many programs written with Windows 2.x in mind also ran on Windows 1.x sometimes.

Provided, that the programmers linked/compiled against the original Windows.h files.
Back then, the new Windows 2.x API calls were simply seen as an optional extension.
So many programmers used the original Windows SDK all the time.

That's why there was so much mismatch (edit: mishmash, I mean).
Windows 1.x EXE files can contain Windows 2.x features, but the other way is also possible.

Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-10, 08:57:

^I disagree a bit. :) In the past, I've tracked down quite a few old Win 1.x/2.x shareware/freeware programs from the 80s and ea […]
Show full quote

^I disagree a bit. 😀 In the past, I've tracked down quite a few old Win 1.x/2.x shareware/freeware programs from the 80s and early 90s,
some of which can be found at that other guy's GUI gallery page..

More than often, these early programs had been replaced by those of higher version numbers.
In the supplied readme files, these programs mentioned earlier versions I was unable to find anymore.

Edit: Before Windows 3.0, programmers simply linked/compiled their programs against
"The MS Windows API".

There was no real distinction between Windows 1.x and Windows 2.x.

Programmers still used books to learn to write Windows programs.
That's why many programs written with Windows 2.x in mind also ran on Windows 1.x sometimes.

Provided, that the programmers linked/compiled against the original Windows.h files.
Back then, the new Windows 2.x API calls were simply seen as an optional extension.
So many programmers used the original Windows SDK all the time.

That's why there was so much mismatch (edit: mishmash, I mean).
Windows 1.x EXE files can contain Windows 2.x features, but the other way is also possible.

Goodness you certainly covered your bases there. Maybe, possible, unable to find any more and in the past. I was speaking of my own experiences. I know what I saw back then in shops, magizines and in real life. If there was a huge amount of shareware/apps available there'd be links all over the place in this thread.

Or in other words/long story short:

When the first FTPs and CDs with shovelware appeared, Windows 3.0 already had caused
most Windows 2.x binaries in the wild to be replaced/overwritten/eradicated.

The only remaining remnants of Windows 2.x (+1x) applications were those that were NOT updated.

Such shareware/freeware/PD applications were sometimes found in "OLDWIN" archives on FTPs and early CD-ROMs made prior 1993.

Edit: Bookware, ie. Books with 5,25" companion disks, is the only chance of finding some last copies, perhaps.

Can't see much if anything relating to vertion 1.x and 2.x in the Simtel cds indexes http://cd.textfiles.com/simtel/

There are still online mirrors for the simtel stuff still like https://ftp.sunet.se/mirror/archive/ftp.sunet … /pub/simtelnet/ which you can download individual shareware/freeware applications.

If you back out to the parent directory there are lots of goodies to be found for other old computer related stuff.

Edit: If anyone one wants to download that ftp mirror it is 10gigs worth of goodies.

Isn't there a flavor of (programming language) BASIC that would work for an 8086 processor?
Not sure if QuickBasic that comes with MS-DOS 6.22 works with 8086 or if it needs 80286+ processor.

mike_canada wrote on 2021-09-12, 06:20:

Isn't there a flavor of (programming language) BASIC that would work for an 8086 processor?
Not sure if QuickBasic that comes with MS-DOS 6.22 works with 8086 or if it needs 80286+ processor.

Don't worry, QB45 from the late 80s will run fine on 8086 systems, still! 😀
In fact, they were still around as low-end systems in the QB days.
QB45 also still supports CGA/Hercules and the Olivetti M24's enhanced CGA graphics.
- The M24 was an 808x system, too.

That being said, I highly recommend installing a NEC V20/V30, nevertheless.
It gives access to so a larger library of DOS applications from the 90s.

For the sake of nostalgia, you can still store the 808x in the old PC..

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-09-10, 09:48:

Can't see much if anything relating to vertion 1.x and 2.x in the Simtel cds indexes http://cd.textfiles.com/simtel/

*sigh* simtel.. 🙄

..

Years ago, I've had been tracking down ancient NE's for weeks/months..
Ask Nathan, if you don't believe me.

Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-12, 06:52:

*sigh* simtel.. 🙄 […]
Show full quote

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-09-10, 09:48:

Can't see much if anything relating to vertion 1.x and 2.x in the Simtel cds indexes http://cd.textfiles.com/simtel/

*sigh* simtel.. 🙄

..

Years ago, I've had been tracking down ancient NE's for weeks/months..
Ask Nathan, if you don't believe me.

Is Nathen your invisible friend? Sorry but I had to ask.....😉

^Funny, really. That's the dude that runs the site, which I assume 99% of users nowadays get their information of Windows 1.x/2.x from.

Edit: Oh drat! 😟 Now I missed a perfect opportunity to make a Perry Rhodan universe reference on a Hitchhiker's themed site!

https://www-perrypedia-de.translate.goog/wiki … tr_pto=nui,elem

Btw, the early Windows applications were simply described as "MS Windows" applications.

No (almost) version numbers were used yet, because Windows 1/2 were about the same in users/developers eyes at the time.
The overlapping windows were the most notable difference.

That's what I desperately tried to make you understand.
Windows was seen differently back then.
It was used as a graphics library that could run multiple applications.

Also people weren't biased back then. MS Windows was a new, little environment.
People didn't hate Windows back then yet, there were no fan boys yet, either.

Also, not all Windows programs were shrink-wrapped.
Developers, in general, often made applications for local companies or universities.
Most of which were never heard of before and never will be heard of again.

dBase compilers like Clipper were often used with other tools (dBase translators etc).
The resulting programs were used for many years, but some of them were never sold publicly.

The same might be true for early Windows programs.

That's why I said, it's so difficult to find out "the truth". 🙁

Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-10, 06:44:

Yes, that's how it looks like. Unfortunately, we will likely never find out about early Windows titles. :( After Windows 3 was […]
Show full quote

Yes, that's how it looks like.
Unfortunately, we will likely never find out about early Windows titles. 🙁
After Windows 3 was released in 1990, many titles were recompiled for it.
That got rid of compatibility warnings, most importantly.

When Windows 3.0 was released developers were more interested in targeting the new features rather than worrying about working with 2x/1x.
Consumers abandoned 2x and 1x very quickly as they could move to 3.0 in just about all cases.

Keep in mind with 2x/1x CD-ROMS and Internet were simply not around for the average consumer - so compilations targeting those versions were lacking.
You might be able to find some archived magazine content which gives some information on applications (there wasn't a huge focus on games)
I noticed some of it when I compiled the real mode archive..

Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-12, 07:16:

^Funny, really. That's the dude that runs the site, which I assume 99% of users nowadays get their information of Windows 1.x/2 […]
Show full quote

^Funny, really. That's the dude that runs the site, which I assume 99% of users nowadays get their information of Windows 1.x/2.x from.

Edit: Oh drat! 😟 Now I missed a perfect opportunity to make a Perry Rhodan universe reference on a Hitchhiker's themed site!

https://www-perrypedia-de.translate.goog/wiki … tr_pto=nui,elem

Btw, the early Windows applications were simply described as "MS Windows" applications.

No (almost) version numbers were used yet, because Windows 1/2 were about the same in users/developers eyes at the time.
The overlapping windows were the most notable difference.

That's what I desperately tried to make you understand.
Windows was seen differently back then.
It was used as a graphics library that could run multiple applications.

Also people weren't biased back then. MS Windows was a new, little environment.
People didn't hate Windows back then yet, there were no fan boys yet, either.

Also, not all Windows programs were shrink-wrapped.
Developers, in general, often made applications for local companies or universities.
Most of which were never heard of before and never will be heard of again.

dBase compilers like Clipper were often used with other tools (dBase translators etc).
The resulting programs were used for many years, but some of them were never sold publicly.

The same might be true for early Windows programs.

That's why I said, it's so difficult to find out "the truth". 🙁

We know what happened because we were there at the time. You are just wont to except that reality....
http://toastytech.com/guis/indexwindows.html

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-09-10, 09:29:

Goodness you certainly covered your bases there. Maybe, possible, unable to find any more and in the past. I was speaking of my own experiences. I know what I saw back then in shops, magizines and in real life. If there was a huge amount of shareware/apps available there'd be links all over the place in this thread.

🤣 no. A lot of software is lost to time.

xcomcmdr wrote on 2021-09-12, 12:10:

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-09-10, 09:29:

Goodness you certainly covered your bases there. Maybe, possible, unable to find any more and in the past. I was speaking of my own experiences. I know what I saw back then in shops, magizines and in real life. If there was a huge amount of shareware/apps available there'd be links all over the place in this thread.

🤣 no. A lot of software is lost to time.

WoW! A post that is just mildly useful. Congratulation. Good good on ya....😉

Keep it up.

Edit: I must load up a sarcasm mitigation module when I fire up this computer thingy.