Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   C Programming (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f42-c-programming.html)
-   -   17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t948565-17-years-that-win95-substituted-win3-1-publish-full-sources.html)

Fabrizio J Bonsignore 07-26-2012 07:46 PM

17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
Windows 3.1 was **officially** superseded by Windows 95 in 1995. Now
it is 17 years. Seventeen years is a typical period of protection for
products which may extended some ways, but now that Win 3.1 turned
into a plethora of more superadvanced OSs, for historical, cultural,
technical reasons Microsoft ought to follow the popular open source
model and publish full, complete, compilable source, data files,
driver files, etc for the popular old OS and its utilities, along with
the necessary compilers, linkers and other tools to make it work. This
would not only preserve the venerable OS but would also trigger a boom
in development and business for the company itself, besides being a
service to the general public.

Danilo J Bonsignore

aftnix 07-26-2012 08:02 PM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
On Friday, July 27, 2012 1:46:52 AM UTC+6, Fabrizio J Bonsignore wrote:
> Windows 3.1 was **officially** superseded by Windows 95 in 1995. Now
> it is 17 years. Seventeen years is a typical period of protection for
> products which may extended some ways, but now that Win 3.1 turned
> into a plethora of more superadvanced OSs, for historical, cultural,
> technical reasons Microsoft ought to follow the popular open source
> model and publish full, complete, compilable source, data files,
> driver files, etc for the popular old OS and its utilities, along with
> the necessary compilers, linkers and other tools to make it work. This
> would not only preserve the venerable OS but would also trigger a boom
> in development and business for the company itself, besides being a
> service to the general public.
>
> Danilo J Bonsignore


I suspect they don't have the legacy tools anymore :)

KBH 07-26-2012 11:04 PM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 

You might be interested in DOS:

http://www.drdos.net/

But the drdos.com website now offers a $20 license and download of a
bootable DOS instead of just the license. So the ftp's of drdos.net
are not needed.


I would recommend running Turbo Pascal 7 on it. But I can no longer
find the French edu website that allowed TP7 downloads to the US
Virgin Islands.

KBH 07-27-2012 12:13 AM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
On Jul 26, 7:04*pm, KBH <emptyp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> You might be interested in DOS:
>
> http://www.drdos.net/
>
> But the drdos.com website now offers a $20 license and download of a
> bootable DOS instead of just the license. So the ftp's of drdos.net
> are not needed.
>
> I would recommend running Turbo Pascal 7 on it. But I can no longer
> find the French edu website that allowed TP7 downloads to the US
> Virgin Islands.


Oh, PowerBasic still sells a programming language that runs on DOS.

Wally W. 07-27-2012 02:26 AM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 12:46:52 -0700 (PDT), Fabrizio J Bonsignore wrote:

>Windows 3.1 was **officially** superseded by Windows 95 in 1995. Now
>it is 17 years. Seventeen years is a typical period of protection for
>products which may extended some ways, but now that Win 3.1 turned
>into a plethora of more superadvanced OSs, for historical, cultural,
>technical reasons Microsoft ought to follow the popular open source
>model and publish full, complete, compilable source, data files,
>driver files, etc for the popular old OS and its utilities, along with
>the necessary compilers, linkers and other tools to make it work. This
>would not only preserve the venerable OS but would also trigger a boom
>in development and business for the company itself, besides being a
>service to the general public.
>
>Danilo J Bonsignore


That is not at the top of my list of things Microsoft ought to do.

Fabrizio J Bonsignore 07-27-2012 04:56 PM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
On Jul 26, 4:08*pm, "China Blue [Tor], Meersburg"
<chine.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Copyrights can last for decades (or forever if you have Disney's lawyers)and do
> not require any disclosure of the work.
>

Oh, Disney lawyers are all homeless and look and act like cartoons? :|

Danilo J Bonsignore

Fabrizio J Bonsignore 07-27-2012 05:02 PM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
cf. http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/0...-a-catastrophe

I want to play the EXACT SAME GAMES in the EXACT SAME HARDWARE with
the EXACT SAME OPERATING SYSTEM. Isnt it what they used to build the
next mess? Alas, not possible, the PC was stolen at some time and
there is almost no way to purchase a new one (nor to guarantee it does
not have some virus without complement antivirus). That s market but
suppliers do not even see it because they are neither in engineering
nor in economics but in some metaspace of shady motivations and
already-got-enough-money.

It is like in, the Vatican deciding to wall paper the Sistine Chapel
because it will be easier to maintain (clean up) and may reduce air
conditioning costs... want to buy a postcard with selected deatils of
the mural?

Danilo J Bonsignore

Keith Thompson 07-27-2012 11:22 PM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
Fabrizio J Bonsignore <syntotic@gmail.com> writes:
> Windows 3.1 was **officially** superseded by Windows 95 in 1995.

[snip]

Just a reminder: this is not topical in any of the newsgroups to which
it was cross-posted.

(If you want to follow up to this, you'll need to manually adjust the
newsgroups header.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

James Kuyper 07-30-2012 02:26 AM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
On 07/29/2012 10:04 PM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> In <lnlii46b8h.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>, on 07/27/2012
> at 04:22 PM, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> said:
>
>> (If you want to follow up to this, you'll need to manually adjust
>> the newsgroups header.)

>
> What give you that idea?


He had "followup-to" set to "alt.dev.null". With most newsreaders I've
used, that means that without a manual adjustment, replies will only go
to alt.dev.null, and not back to comp.lang.c. Does yours work differently?
--
James Kuyper

rugxulo@gmail.com 08-04-2012 04:47 AM

Re: 17 years that Win95 substituted Win3.1: publish full sources
 
Hi,

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 2:46:52 PM UTC-5, Fabrizio J Bonsignore wrote:
>
> Windows 3.1 was **officially** superseded by Windows 95 in 1995. Now
> it is 17 years. Seventeen years is a typical period of protection for
> products which may extended some ways, but now that Win 3.1 turned
> into a plethora of more superadvanced OSs, for historical, cultural,
> technical reasons Microsoft ought to follow the popular open source
> model and publish full, complete, compilable source, data files,
> driver files, etc for the popular old OS and its utilities, along with
> the necessary compilers, linkers and other tools to make it work. This
> would not only preserve the venerable OS but would also trigger a boom
> in development and business for the company itself, besides being a
> service to the general public.


MS probably has tons of copyrights they can't legally clear for that. Similar
to IBM and OS/2, who has already denied open sourcing any of it. Besides,
which would you want, Win 3.0, 3.1, 3.11? Somewhat different quirks.

Most old OSes don't like newer hardware, esp. higher RAM amounts, which often
confuse them, so you need lots of tweaks and patches. Plus they even lack
drivers, which is more painful. And it's quite hard finding software for older
OSes too. At least, most software these days seems to go out of its way to
only support the "big three", which is a pet peeve of mine.

Anyways, to bring it back on topic to C (barely), you already have enough free
OSes and compilers to play with: Minix (ACK), FreeDOS (OpenWatcom),
ELKS (dev86), Linux (GCC), FreeBSD (Clang), etc. All of those OSes are, more
or less, written in C.

Personally, I like FreeDOS a lot, and DOS is what Win 3.1 ran atop anyways. So
there's still a lot of DOS software out there (though waning in popularity).
So if you're desperate for nostalgia, try that. If you demand a GUI, try
OpenGem (GEM) or the recent port of FLTK to DJGPP.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.