If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 13:45:37 +0100, mechanic wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 20:59:59 +1200, Ralph Fox wrote: Microsoft provides free Windows VMs which only expire after 90 days. https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/tools/vms/ After the 90 days has expired, the Windows 7 versions can be re-armed a couple of times. Which gives you more time before you have to start afresh and re-install programs. They don't go back very far; Microsoft will only provide *supported* versions of Windows. Inside the free VMs, help for the VMs still mentions the XP version. But the download page no longer has it. for an afternoon's fun try loading Windows95 with IE3 into VirtualBox. OTOH I had no problem installing Windows98 with IE4 into VMware Player. -- Kind regards Ralph 🦊 |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , VanguardLH writes: J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: I can't see why they can't be sandboxed/emulated/whatever, Sure they can. Get a VMM (virtual machine manager), like VMWare Player or VirtualBox, and install your OS bitwidth of choice in a VM where you run old programs that require that particular OS. I got the impression that the WOWs were, in effect, something like a VMM - not exactly do, hence my "whatever". A vendor isn't going to continue supporting a product that they discontinued. YOU become the support team thereafter. It's up to you to find a solution. True. I thought the WOWs were tools I/users could use towards that end. Looks like your solutions are, so far: Run Windows 32-bit in a VM where you use Turnpike 6 or use the older Turnpike 5 on Windows 64-bit. I was asking the question out of more general interest; I only mentioned Turnpike specifically in passing, as an example of even a 32-bit software that doesn't run under 64-bit Windows (for reasons different to most). (I'm actually running it in a real - not virtual - 32-bit machine; this 32-bit W7 SP1 is more than adequate for my needs. [It has well under 4G of RAM - 3, I think. I don't think 64-bit W7 would give me any benefit.]) Same here. Actually, I think it's a bit challenging to find a 32 bit Windows 7 computer, (and if you're looking at the listings on eBay or Amazon, it's not always spelled out either, for that matter). I've got the 32 bit OS version (like you) precisely so I can still run a few old programs at my own beckoning, although admitedly, it's not very often, anymore. I just want - and really appreciate - having that flexibility. (Plus I also like having just one Program Files folder to have to keep track of, and keeping things a bit simpler, in general. I guess you could say that also includes getting some drivers for some older stuff too, when needed. However, I expect for most folks, the benefits of x64 will outweigh all of this. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 10:14:41 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:
They don't go back very far; for an afternoon's fun try loading Windows95 with IE3 into VirtualBox. I have 98SE available in VMware, but I've only run it a few times to see if it works. It does, but it didn't inspire me to go even farther back to 95. What's rather shocking is just how creaky and old fashioned these systems are. The jump from Win95 to XP seems to be huge, as is the jump from XP to current levels of Win10. Getting a virtual machine running with Win95 is rather involved because the install CDs don't boot(and you need a product ID key, no 30 days grace). After finding a boot floppy image for DOS and getting win95 to load, the networking didn't work for me (and the network support tools are creaky). After getting that going I'm stuck with a 640x480 window and no way of making that larger. The sites with installer drivers for video won't load in IE3! |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
mechanic wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 10:14:41 -0500, Char Jackson wrote: They don't go back very far; for an afternoon's fun try loading Windows95 with IE3 into VirtualBox. I have 98SE available in VMware, but I've only run it a few times to see if it works. It does, but it didn't inspire me to go even farther back to 95. What's rather shocking is just how creaky and old fashioned these systems are. The jump from Win95 to XP seems to be huge, as is the jump from XP to current levels of Win10. Getting a virtual machine running with Win95 is rather involved because the install CDs don't boot(and you need a product ID key, no 30 days grace). After finding a boot floppy image for DOS and getting win95 to load, the networking didn't work for me (and the network support tools are creaky). After getting that going I'm stuck with a 640x480 window and no way of making that larger. The sites with installer drivers for video won't load in IE3! You can slave up the disk from the Win95 machine to another more capable VM, and "inject" the downloaded EXE into the container from there. Then shut down that machine, go back and boot the Win95 one. ******* For the really tough cases, you can always switch on the emulated serial port in the VM and transfer files across over the serial port. Paul |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 11:52:57 +0100, mechanic
wrote: On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 10:14:41 -0500, Char Jackson wrote: They don't go back very far; for an afternoon's fun try loading Windows95 with IE3 into VirtualBox. I have 98SE available in VMware, but I've only run it a few times to see if it works. It does, but it didn't inspire me to go even farther back to 95. What's rather shocking is just how creaky and old fashioned these systems are. The jump from Win95 to XP seems to be huge, as is the jump from XP to current levels of Win10. VMs make it very easy to quickly switch between any or all of the various Windows versions since they can all literally be running at the same time, so while it's easy to see that the changes from 95/98 to XP are huge, in a good way, the changes from XP to 10 are also huge, but in a bad way. It's easy to see that Windows hit its peak, from the user perspective, in the XP/7 era, and the declines happened sharply after that. That's from a user perspective. I'm sure that Microsoft's perspective is that each successive version only added to the user experience, giving people more of what they want. They would be wrong, of course. -- Char Jackson |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
In message , Char Jackson
writes: [] VMs make it very easy to quickly switch between any or all of the various Windows versions since they can all literally be running at the same time, so while it's easy to see that the changes from 95/98 to XP are huge, in a good way, the changes from XP to 10 are also huge, but in a bad way. It's easy to see that Windows hit its peak, from the user perspective, in the XP/7 era, and the declines happened sharply after that. I felt very at home with 98SElite. I accepted XP (and NTFS - and I know you don't _have_ to run it under NTFS), despite some reservations, for some genuine benefits (of which the only one I can remember now is better handling of USB, at least of memory sticks). I've found 7 about an equal balance (compared to XP) - I'd say I've gained about as much as I lost; I'm using 7 mainly because it's supported (by users, not Microsoft), in much the same way XP was a few years ago. I really don't like the thinking behind 10, so don't know where I'll go when 7 support fades, if it does. That's from a user perspective. I'm sure that Microsoft's perspective is that each successive version only added to the user experience, giving people more of what they want. They would be wrong, of course. I could believe there are people inside MS that genuinely think that people want the changes they've made; the cynic in me does _not_ believe that, but knows they'll continue pretending that [rather than admitting the changes are more and more for MS's benefit, not the users']. This (cynicism) may be a function of increasing age (on my part, not Microsoft's). -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf This space unintentionally left blank. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Char Jackson writes: [] VMs make it very easy to quickly switch between any or all of the various Windows versions since they can all literally be running at the same time, so while it's easy to see that the changes from 95/98 to XP are huge, in a good way, the changes from XP to 10 are also huge, but in a bad way. It's easy to see that Windows hit its peak, from the user perspective, in the XP/7 era, and the declines happened sharply after that. I felt very at home with 98SElite. I accepted XP (and NTFS - and I know you don't _have_ to run it under NTFS), despite some reservations, for some genuine benefits (of which the only one I can remember now is better handling of USB, at least of memory sticks). I've found 7 about an equal balance (compared to XP) - I'd say I've gained about as much as I lost; I'm using 7 mainly because it's supported (by users, not Microsoft), in much the same way XP was a few years ago. I really don't like the thinking behind 10, so don't know where I'll go when 7 support fades, if it does. That's from a user perspective. I'm sure that Microsoft's perspective is that each successive version only added to the user experience, giving people more of what they want. They would be wrong, of course. I could believe there are people inside MS that genuinely think that people want the changes they've made; the cynic in me does _not_ believe that, but knows they'll continue pretending that [rather than admitting the changes are more and more for MS's benefit, not the users']. This (cynicism) may be a function of increasing age (on my part, not Microsoft's). Of course, why else would we now have the "subscription models", like Office 365? You forgot another big advantage of NTFS - you don't have to worry about reaching the maximum file size limit of 2 GB or 4 GB (depending) in FAT32. That's easily reached by image backup programs, and many videos, etc. (Plus I haven't had to worry about all those chkdisk fragments (001, 002, etc) either :-) I once tried a Virtual Machine, but find it a lot simpler to not have to use it (or dual booting either, for that matter). Thus my sticking to 32 bit OS's for the near future, so as to be able to run some current and older programs effortlessly. (And of course, there is only one Programs Files folder to keep track of, which is nice). For me, like you I think, I just don't have any need for any 64 bit programs, or even that much memory ( 4GB) capability. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 11:52:57 +0100, mechanic wrote:
Getting a virtual machine running with Win95 is rather involved because the install CDs don't boot(and you need a product ID key, no 30 days grace). After finding a boot floppy image for DOS and getting win95 to load, the networking didn't work for me (and the network support tools are creaky). After getting that going I'm stuck with a 640x480 window and no way of making that larger. The window size problem is a problem of VirtualBox, not a problem of virtual machines in general. Unlike VMware, VirtualBox does not have guest additions for Win9x. In VMware Player, Windows 98 (First Edition) uses the full size of my 1920 x 1080 monitor. The sites with installer drivers for video won't load in IE3! For the browser problem, try installing K-Meleon 1.5.4 from http://kmeleonbrowser.org/download.php. K-Meleon is based on Mozilla Firefox's rendering engine but uses less system resources. I ran K-Meleon 1.5.4 in Windows 98. K-Meleon 1.5.4 is a few years old but still much newer than IE3. K-Meleon 1.6.0-Beta2 was a not stable enough for me. Later versions of K-Meleon do not run on Win9x. -- Kind regards Ralph |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 22:41:53 +1200, Ralph Fox wrote:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 11:52:57 +0100, mechanic wrote: Getting a virtual machine running with Win95 is rather involved because the install CDs don't boot(and you need a product ID key, no 30 days grace). After finding a boot floppy image for DOS and getting win95 to load, the networking didn't work for me (and the network support tools are creaky). After getting that going I'm stuck with a 640x480 window and no way of making that larger. The window size problem is a problem of VirtualBox, not a problem of virtual machines in general. Unlike VMware, VirtualBox does not have guest additions for Win9x. True there are no guest additions available to Win9x virtualbox machines, but the recommended video driver from SciTech solves the window size issue and comes on a convenient .iso file that can be loaded simply into the virtual machine. Still working on the browser, thanks! Amazing that there are available files of lots of win9x install ..iso's on't interweb, also that the product keys are also easy to find, although some trial and error was necessary (on my part). |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 10:43:38 +0100, mechanic wrote:
True there are no guest additions available to Win9x virtualbox machines, but the recommended video driver from SciTech solves the window size issue and comes on a convenient .iso file that can be loaded simply into the virtual machine. That's good to hear. Still working on the browser, thanks! -- Kind regards Ralph |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 23:10:18 +1200, Ralph Fox wrote:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 10:43:38 +0100, mechanic wrote: True there are no guest additions available to Win9x virtualbox machines, but the recommended video driver from SciTech solves the window size issue and comes on a convenient .iso file that can be loaded simply into the virtual machine. That's good to hear. Still working on the browser, thanks! With a more up to date browser things look better (installable by including the browser install file in an iso which can be loaded into the virtual machine). Now the limiting factor in browsing seems to be lack of the right certificates, I can't see a way of bypassing those checks even temporarily! |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On 08/17/2018 04:43 AM, mechanic wrote:
[snip] True there are no guest additions available to Win9x virtualbox machines, but the recommended video driver from SciTech solves the window size issue and comes on a convenient .iso file that can be loaded simply into the virtual machine. It worked for me, larger screen and (more important for what I wanted) more colors. The .iso was easy to load, although I have now set up Samba. However, I still wish for mouse integration. As to internet access, it would have been easier if I had remembered what I did in 1995. Install TCP/IP. Apparently, you were expected to have no use for a web browser unless you had a modem. Still working on the browser, thanks! Mine (Win95 CD) came with MSIE4, and I wanted to see how my website did with that. Most JavaScript will not work, but CSS does. Amazing that there are available files of lots of win9x install .iso's on't interweb, also that the product keys are also easy to find, although some trial and error was necessary (on my part). While I still have the CD I bought, it's nice to have an alternative. There is Win 3.1, but I don't really want it, and internet access is even harder to set up with that. Maybe NT4 someday. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it." -- Albert Einstein |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On 08/17/2018 06:41 AM, mechanic wrote:
[snip] With a more up to date browser things look better (installable by including the browser install file in an iso which can be loaded into the virtual machine). Now the limiting factor in browsing seems to be lack of the right certificates, I can't see a way of bypassing those checks even temporarily! I have noticed that old browsers will often come up with aan error message, since the "home page" nor points to a site with modern SSL. Changing the home page to something else fixes that. I have the newer browsers in other systems: 5 (non-updated 2000), 5.5 (ME), 6 (updated 2000). I wanted to see how MSIE4 did. Strangely, I do have a clock page that works in MSIE4, at http://notstupid.us/clox/clockie.html . Unexpectedly, this works in modern browsers too. BTW, yes, I forgot a 'var'. It still works. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it." -- Albert Einstein |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/17/2018 04:43 AM, mechanic wrote: [snip] True there are no guest additions available to Win9x virtualbox machines, but the recommended video driver from SciTech solves the window size issue and comes on a convenient .iso file that can be loaded simply into the virtual machine. It worked for me, larger screen and (more important for what I wanted) more colors. The .iso was easy to load, although I have now set up Samba. However, I still wish for mouse integration. As to internet access, it would have been easier if I had remembered what I did in 1995. Install TCP/IP. Apparently, you were expected to have no use for a web browser unless you had a modem. In Windows 95? IIRC, it came with its own Internet stuff compared to Windows 3.x. I remember using Trumpet Winsock for dial-up Internet services with shell accounts (SLIP and PPP). UNIX shell accounts were using non-free TIA and free open source SLiRP binaries. Still working on the browser, thanks! Mine (Win95 CD) came with MSIE4, and I wanted to see how my website did with that. Most JavaScript will not work, but CSS does. Amazing that there are available files of lots of win9x install .iso's on't interweb, also that the product keys are also easy to find, although some trial and error was necessary (on my part). While I still have the CD I bought, it's nice to have an alternative. There is Win 3.1, but I don't really want it, and internet access is even harder to set up with that. Maybe NT4 someday. Augh. Yeah, not Internet friendly back then. -- Quote of the Week: "Where there is sugar, there are bound to be ants." --Malay Proverb Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / http://antfarm.ma.cx / /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit- | |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link. \ _ / ( ) |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Why is WOW not recursive (and 16, 8 bit)?
On 08/17/2018 03:47 PM, Ant wrote:
[snip] As to internet access, it would have been easier if I had remembered what I did in 1995. Install TCP/IP. Apparently, you were expected to have no use for a web browser unless you had a modem. In Windows 95? IIRC, it came with its own Internet stuff compared to Windows 3.x. Win 95 does provide TCP/IP, but it it not enabled by default. You have to make the proper settings. Easy, now I remember when 95 was he current version. [snip] There is Win 3.1, but I don't really want it, and internet access is even harder to set up with that. Maybe NT4 someday. Augh. Yeah, not Internet friendly back then. I didn't have internet access until 1995, because then the phone company started treating some nearby cities as local. I avoided using Windows until I had to to use the web*. At first, it was Compuserve on Windows 3.1. At that time I had a lot of trouble with the 28.8K modem disconnecting itself. It turned out that that modem (which worked fine on BBSes) didn't work right on Windows. * also one add-on card called PC Tele-Vision -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it." -- Albert Einstein |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|