Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by lproven | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

lproven

> Win32 APIs, unavailable to Windows 3.1

"I think you'll find it's a little bit more complicated than that."

Windows 3 could run Win32 code:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Win32s

It's still out there:

https://winworldpc.com/product/win32s/130

It's a good way to get the old tiny fast Freecell on Windows 11. The FREECELL.EXE binary in Win32s runs fine on Windows 11 x86-64. (And on Arm64 come to that.)

And OS/2 could run Win32s:

https://www.os2world.com/wiki/index.php/Win32s

... At least until the final version, 1.30c (IIRC) when MS found a way to nobble it so OS/2 couldn't run it any more.

View on HN

Nitpick: Win32s was limited, and missed a lot of functionality. From the linked Wikipedia article:

The "s" in Win32s signifies subset, as Win32s lacked a number of Windows NT functions, including multi-threading, asynchronous I/O, newer serial port functions and many GDI extensions. This generally limited it to "Win32s applications" which were specifically designed for the Win32s platform."

There was a MS knowledge base article with the long list of limitations, archived here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110524062145/http://support.mi...

Oh, yes, totally true. It wasn't a lot of actual use, but a few non-trivial apps ran. (Briefly, this being Win3.)

But it falsifies the statement that 32-bit code didn't run on Win3. Even late-era DOS has 32-bit apps.

I recall Westwood Monopoly (great game, btw) requiring Win32s to be installed to run the game on Windows 3.x. It also required WinG (which eventually got deprecated for DirectX). I have fond memories of playing around with Freecell and Microsoft Doggie (test app for WinG).

Not a commercially viable target for most companies. Win32s was a stopgap for Win32 support for lower end machines when only WinNT was around. Once Win95 arrived, Win32s's days were numbered (along with 16-bit Win 3.x).

If you're designing a Win32 app for Windows 95, are you going to stick with the Win3.1 look and feel? No. You're redesigning your UI to look like a native Win95 app.

Where are your testing resources targeted? Win32s? Nope. Win95 only.

Well maybe if Win95 sales are slow, you'll do more testing on Win32s...

Then you read https://finance.yahoo.com/news/microsofts-windows-95-softwar...

People lined up to buy Win95 at midnight on release day? [Before Harry Potter book and iPhone releases] Commercial consumer Win32s support died that day.

So running Win95 apps on OS/2 2.1 running Win3.1 running Win32s DLLs wasn't going to be a supported platform for software companies.

IBM didn't want Win32 apps. They wanted OS/2 PM apps.

Oh, for any companies, I'd think.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com