ajp166 at bellatlantic.net
Thu Nov 22 08:11:31 CST 2007
>Subject: Re: Windoze reqs
> From: Josh Dersch <derschjo at msu.edu>
> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 16:11:43 -0800
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only <cctech at classiccmp.org>
>If I may ask, what was glitchy about video modes in Windows 3.1? I ran
>it at 640x480 for years without any obvious video issues...
Same here, I still have a copy running on a laptop at that resolution.
>As an aside, I had Win95 running on EGA for awhile just as an
>experiment. On a 386sx-20 with 4mb ram on a 65MB Miniscribe MFM drive.
>It ran, but that's about the only good thing I can attribute to the
Not enough ram, at 8mb it become moderately useful. I used to make
headless print network servers that way. Install 95B, strip out OE/IE
and cruft install laser printer driver put on net. It usually fits
well in 100MB. Prefered CPU for that was any of the miniboard 386 or
486s but one time I had a 386sx/16 brick and used it with good results
(it was a slow printer to start with). The boards with 86sx were best
cooling was never an issue so the fans could fail and CPU coolers
were not needed.
>Fred Cisin wrote:
>>>> 3.00 would (and did) run on 8088. One of the font editors that I used
>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Sridhar Ayengar wrote:
>>> Not only that, it worked properly with a CGA.
>> 3.10 would also work with CGA, but like all video modes, it was somewhat
>> glitchy. It appears to me that 3.10 was written by people using
>> 800 x 600. With a little playing around, it's probably not too hard to
>> determine which video board they used.
More information about the cctech