Windows 96
windows96.net
windows96.net
Gives me PTSD-like flashbacks to the time when I was tasked with installing Windows 95 on 50+ computers on the local school.
For the young(er), Windows was on 14-ish 3.5" floppy disks, and I had to do some heavy calculation and logistics copying those discs while installing the OS to make my effort as efficient as possible.
IIRC, I managed to keep the installing cyclus going on 28 computers at a time, and finished the whole task during a very long Saturday and Sunday.
But you could be a little more scientific and try different parameters once you went back to disk 1. Maybe also remove some of the more questionable drivers or memory-saving tweaks from your DOS configuration while you were at it. Or perhaps it was just a flaky floppy drive that randomly flipped a bit somewhere.
Fyi: that is as far as I know the reason for most oldy cab installation files being that size.
Microsoft historically used the 21 512 byte sector, 80 track, double-sided DMF format for 3 1/2" Windows installation media, yielding 1,720,320 bytes per floppy.
Assuming this format, floppy requirements for the four Windows 10 21H1 variants currently on MSDN are
x64 Consumer (Home/Pro): 3,398 floppies
x64 Business (Enterprise/Education): 3,323 floppies
x86 Consumer: 2,416 floppies
x86 Business: 2,361 floppies
Assuming the "1.44 MB" (18 512 byte sector, 80 track, double-sided) format, you'd need x64 Consumer: 3,965 floppies
x64 Business: 3,876 floppies
x86 Consumer: 2,819 floppies
x86 Business: 2,755 floppies
In this case, assuming the most popular (x64) platform, you'd actually need closer to 4,000 floppies.Assuming ideal 500 kbit/sec performance and two seconds per disk swap, reading 4,000 "1.44 MB" floppies (or DMF floppies with equivalent data) would take just under 28 1/2 hours.
So you could easily install any Windows 10 21H1 version from floppies in the course of a single work week, with enough time left over, perhaps, to check Windows Update over a 56 kbps modem (though you'd probably need the weekend, at least, to actually download the updates).
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2c5cd026959b010ad57e34...
I raise your floppy disk install one OS/2 Warp install: https://twitter.com/jhegarty/status/1162326199445655552/phot...
I still feel that OS/2 Warp feels more valuable in ones hands, just because of the sheer weight of it… (compared to modern OSes that have no weight because I download them…)
I prefer your explanation, but I suspect it's also a chain of events from "Edison Disc Record" to "Compact Disc". The link is "Audio", absent from both product names.
Maybe it will just be called an "audio" someday! "Hey, I have an audio of that new band Named!" Hooray, it works in a sentence. Sold.
Diskettes, floppy disks etc were invented in the USA, where the standard spelling is "disk".
Compact discs were invented by Philips, who probably preferred the British spelling "disc", and Sony, who probably didn't care.
You can find the spelling "hard disc" in RISC OS, a 1990s British operating system: https://www.riscos.info/index.php/Introduction_to_RISC_OS#Us...
The solution was to put it in the fridge for a few minutes, read as much as possible off before the lube got thin again.
The tribal knowledge why we put very specific HDDs in the fridge got lost, but people still stick failing HDDs into fridges... go figure.
I believe I only had a Windows 98 'Upgrade' CD, which could not be used to install on a bare system. This meant I had to first install a previous copy Windows, which in my case was Windows 95 on floppy disks (and I feel like it was 20 disks, at least for my installation).
This worked fine until one re-install disk 15 decided to fail on me. I managed to hack it back together by copying the files that were still accessible to a different computer and then copying them to a blank floppy together with the missing files from the running system's Windows folder (I think it was a couple of dlls that were unreadable). I was surprised that it worked.
I guess you're limited to 3.5 GB of memory too what with Windows 98 being a 32-bit operating system which might be a pain, and perhaps a bigger problem is that no drivers have been written for a couple of decades.
That being said, I feel like I install much less software than I used to. They used to hand out CDs with computer magazines that were basically dumps of random quality freeware/shareware. The amount of registry items and other such crap that kind of software left lying around is probably a large reason why a re-format was required so often.
I was floored to realize how much faster things were. No wait time for a Windows Explorer window to open. Everything was snappy, even after reinstalling games and antivirus. It blew my mind.
I still think it helps, but with a much longer tail on the frequency required. Windows XP definitely grew slow over time though, whether that was due to installing programs, caches I could’ve cleared with CClearner, or more incremental updating. We leave a lot on the OS over time.
The very first time I reinstalled WinXP was shortly after I got my first computer of my own for my 12th birthday. I was tinkering with some of the files, and discovered that I could open .cur cursor files in MS Paint. I edited one of the cursor files, saved it as a bmp and renamed the file to .cur under the assumption that this would work. Set my custom cur file as cursor and logged out. When I tried to log back in I couldn’t. Whoops. Freaked out for a second thinking I had broken everything. Remembered that there was a red floppy disk with an ambulance on it that came with the computer. Rebooted the machine with the red floppy disk and reinstalled Windows. Lost my files but had nothing valuable at the time anyways. Have lost more valuable data since then. And expect to lose more data in the future still :p
So I put the disk in, and it says something like "Do you want to install Lindows?" with no options, no warnings or anything. So I hit Yes/Okay/whatever the single button on the screen was, and without zero warning, it proceeded to wipe my entire hard drive.
It's been 17 years and it still hurts :)
1gb of ram on win 7 equals 4 times of 256 mb win 98 era. With 8gb it's 32 times larger. That's just ram though, not to mention processing power between pentium 3-4 with multicore i series.
The difference in ram caching and cpu processing is big that some additional process won't give much problem.
But feel free to look at all the extensions and bullshit you have in your browsers and bash shell
...Hmm, probably undocumented API stuff :/
You had to unload it to play some games, though, otherwise they wouldn't fit into memory (DOOM on 4 MB systems, Duke Nukem on 8 MB systems).
God, I am old.
I actually still do that with Windows 10, about once a year I start over. I have a chocolatey command to re-install 90% of my software.
> usually the system would get into some kind of bad state after several months of usage (or at least mine did)
Sometimes some part of the bad state would go okay again for me after some more months of waiting. E.g. the system would only go past the Windows 95 loading screen after opening and closing the CD-ROM drive but at some point that problem would disappear.
:)
As I recall it, there was actually a minimal set of files needed to trigger the CD to install and you didn't actually need a full 95 install. I worked at a shop at the time and remember doing a lot of reinstalls from those upgrade disks and we definitely didn't spend the time to reinstall both OSs.
I tried searching and the closest I could find was that win95 upgrade would do a full install if you told it to find the old win3.1 on the win3.1 install floppy. I vaguely remember doing something similar, so either it was those versions (unlikely, but possible) or later versions had the same trick.
We definitely did a lot of full windows installs from the upgrade disks without installing the full previous OS first.
Simplicity at the extreme. I miss those times where hacking and learning was as easy as breaking things and repairing them. But I think this also was a source of fear against computers for most people : if I click on the wrong place, it will break and cost money.
Nowadays systems are nearly unbreakable, and that’s cool, but o boy when they break, good luck finding why.
Good thing I had a copy of "PCs for Dummies" which told how to fix the catastrophe
And that was the day I learned how to reinstall an OS.
Yes, of course I had spare boot floppies. 8)
E: back when we had 28k and 56k dial up modems (think 2-6KB per second) the computer was more of its own universe. I learned Linux through info and man and internet resources for bigger concepts. O’Reilly books were great back then. I learned so much that is still with me today because it’s what I had available and it was still and expansive universe. How small and limiting it would feel by today’s standards.
I remember installing offie 4.3 and windows 95 from floppies - I assume office 95 at some point too. Dozens of floppies.
Still, a godsend for multi installs and undoing the abuse from the youth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IBsTvWItY0
There is also Windows 98 install in real time from 39 disks:
$6.50/hr rotating diskettes around computer rooms >>> $4.35/hr sweeping hair and cleaning toilets at a beauty shop
Later I learnt you could customise the Windows CD, burn it yourself and include service packs, drivers etc. on it. That saved a lot of time (because back then, reinstalling every few months was a thing).
You can scan an interface of this fashion and be almost certain about what is a button, what is a scroll bar, what is a text input, etcetera.
While with Windows 8+ the flat UI lets a huge space for ambiguity and causes a bigger cognitive load to the user, who is forced to tell things between flat rectangles and lines.
I wish we could somehow force people to use a standard toolkit again, but I think the cat is out of the bag.
And yes, on text you'd want a minimal UI. You don't see books with flashy things everywhere competing for your attention, maybe excepting kids' books.
My guess is that, as someone already pointed about design doing a full circle again in a few years, it already has happened in the web several times - plain text and 'brutalist' design, then the native UI controls that had to be used within web interfaces, then skeumorphic design to compensate for the native UI controls, then you could style those UI controls as you wished, then flattening all the design again because most of web is text.
I remember back in the 90's, when Apple and Microsoft bragged about having big UI labs where they tried to take a scientific approach to UI design where they'd try out minor UI tweaks on users and observe what worked and what didn't.
Looking at the designs coming out of both companies now (but mostly Apple) it's extremely clear they they are designed just to look "fresh" and "pretty" with no real justification behind it.
> I wish we could somehow force people to use a standard toolkit again
To be fair, in the 90's, there were plenty of crazily themed programs. Basically any media playing app seemed required to have some insane theme (WinAmp is fondly remembered but that was also a non-standard UI, which was so poorly-designed they needed a button to double the size of it so you could hit some buttons easier). Every PC sound card came with a suite of programs that tried to mimic the appearance of a home Hi-Fi system complete with 7-segment displays and fake cassette tape reels.
Bingo. This is exactly it for me, right here. Being able to tell what I can click on and expect it to do something, at a glance and without having to guess is the killer feature, IMO. How did we lose our way so badly that "can I click on this thing?" even became a reasonable question to ask of a modern UI?
Monochrome vector icons make things like dark mode easier to implement. Such small software shops like Microsoft unfortunately cannot afford to hire designers to do multiple sets of icons.
I had to chuckle. I remember back in the Windows 3.11 days, there used be a separate monochrome set of icons for all Windows (and Microsoft) programs.
Unfortunately, we’ll probably be at Windows 20 before the last of the Windows 8-style monochrome icons finally finds its way out of Windows, because that’s how things go at Microsoft. (It’s harder than it used to be, but I’m pretty sure you can still find a few Windows 95-era icons hanging around, and there are definitely still some 2000 icons in there).
Also, many of the DOS applications with icons in moricons.dll probably still run in 32-bit Windows 10. NTVDM and DOS application support don't exist in 64-bit Windows, but they're still alive and well in 32-bit Windows (albeit an optional install, because MS would really rather people not still be using DOS applications in 2021).
I feel disgusted using Windows 10.
I don't remember my experiences on an old Pentium-class processor being the same (except for that old work machine with a dual-proc. NT on a dualie was quite nice for the late 90s)
It is easy to find the culprit: tablets, and mobile devices in general, and to a lesser extent, web apps.
Mobile devices needed a new kind of UI, something suitable for small touch screens. People tried things, apparently they are still trying, because it is a mess.
But now, we have another problem. Desktop UIs and Mobile UIs are very different. And this, in itself, is a bad thing. Mobile and desktop computers do a lot of the same thing, you shouldn't have to learn how to do it twice. So they tried to unify, and in the process, lost decades of UI refinement.
The next issue is portability. We have web apps, Desktop UIs, Mobile UIs, different OSes, etc... Developers don't want to make a different UI for every system, and users want consistency. The least common denominator is the web browser, so designers use that, but the web is made for documents, it is terrible for apps, but clever devs make do.
So as you see, we now have a lot of hard problems to solve at the same time, and the desktop UI became part of it.
Exactly this.
The flat "Metro" UI style was initially modeled and developed on Windows Phone 7, and for what it did, it was (imho) a great way to use a phone.
Then the rest of microsoft took what that group was doing and made it one-size-fits-all UI for everything windows.
Originally it was for Zune, which inspired Windows Phone 7, and then it was horrifically mangled for Windows 8.
WP7 Metro had a ton of affordances to make the phone easy to use, things like scrollable pages of content should always show a peek of content that is below the current view, so users know there is more content down below.
Common sense stuff that has been forgotten. :(
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/continuum
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/dev...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10_Mobile
and it had its merits (from a phone-centric view) but the (crappy) UI remained even when there was not any more need for it (and a Windows 2000/Windows 7 like one would be much more suitable to laptos/desktops or anyway for no-touch devices).
When a product manager asks me to make something look more "modern" these days that usually ends up being code for flattening the UI by eliminating signifiers/affordances like button borders, link indicators, scroll bars, etc. I thought skeuomorphism was garish, but at least it provided the occasional helpful metaphor.
There was a PDF on HN long ago about the Win95 research project. I found this, but it's not what I recall (I remember a loooong PDF): https://socket3.wordpress.com/2018/02/03/designing-windows-9...
"Flat" design is dereliction of design.
Seems like if you were a deeply unusual person you could actually do some computing in here :) main thing missing is a browser.
What I liked most about .mod files is that you could actually open them directly in the editors and see how they were made, quite fun to do that with old games that still used this format (Death Rally, DX-ball 2, Unreal (Tournament)).
I wish today's apps made interactions little more fun like this.
Like on Smugmug, which is generally a great product, when you try to delete a photo it has a message like “Do you really want to say good bye to … .jpg”
Imagine if that was a photo of your dead grandma or worse
Also, why would you delete a picture of your grandma if she's gone? I think the message would be working well in that case.
Say what you will, I think that the Win9x UI was fantastic and much better than the Windows 10/11 ones.
I've attempted something similar a few times. Currently working on a year long side project to do something with tons of features that looks like Windows 10.
This is a great list of similar projects https://github.com/syxanash/awesome-web-desktops.
My favorite is probably Windows 93, but this Windows 96 one is in my top 5.
On Firefox,
indexedDB request error ldb-async.js:25:17
onerror https://windows96.net/system/libraries/kernel/ldb-async.js:25
EDIT: It works on normal windows, it doesn't on incognito mode.So why is it showing files when you type ls and not dir, and why dir command is not found?
It says it's running on RISC-V.
and a Windows 95 emulator! lol
Actually I didn't notice the package manager. It's a bit slow to install, and after installing I get ZIP file error when trying to run dosbox. There are a billion minesweeper clones that likely are trivial to integrate.
The fact that you can run an actual copy of Windows 95 inside it and run Minesweeper there is way more impressive to me (and it worked fine for me, for what it's worth).
* There are existing examples of JS x86 emulation or compiling stuff to WebAssembly, e.g. [0] let you run Windows 2000 in a browser over a decade ago.
thank you for that, it made my day :)
I'm thinking it's a real shame that the internet isn't like that anymore. I've kind of been wanting to build my own forum or something. Maybe bring some of that back
Not sure if it's the intended behavior, but when opening the start menu if "Programs" is clicked, the start menu closes as if an executable option was chosen instead.
Same case for the sub directories under this menu.
This site is so nostalgic.
Works like a charm in Safari, although I am annoyed that Safari won't give me an actual full screen experience without fiddling with some setting I've probably never paid any attention to before ("Always Show Toolbar in Full Screen").
PS: just kidding, amazing project
Wow, what a demonstration how far web technology has come.
No scroll, no keyboard input, just klick open, move over to your app in less then 1 second and done.
Where is my minesweeper and freecell?
To see all available commands in the terminal type "help" or "bins".