windows for 8086

[mostly486]

no big deal,but could you put windows 3.0,or posibly windows 3.1 on a 8086 or 8088?Then i will spend the money to buy he vintage OS(windows 2.0,might work)not to mention only 512K RAM?

[This message has been edited by mostly486 (edited 05-21-2000).]

[Missing the point]

hehe, it might work, an if it did, it woul;d be funny, how slow it would be, but hey, why not try it!

[Wiz]

get windows 1.0, its floating around somewhere

[Gene C.]

for windows 3.0 you will need atleast a 286 with atleast 640 k conv. mem and 256 extnd.

with 512 it will most likely tell you not enought memory to load o/s. and that is with you doing it by the 1.4 disk or loading from the harddrive. and so the answer is NO

and you allso know you must have and older ver. of dos to even load the windows with!!!

[richamies]

Windows 3.0 will work fine on an 8086/8088 cpu, I had it on my old PS/2 model 30(8088,640kb,20mb,VGA).

[bdunn]

if you can find windows 1.6 i think it would work

[SoopaStar]

I think I have a copy of windows 1.x. got it from a member here about a year ago.
Paul

[mostly486]

Accually,gene,I remember having a computer with 512k and having win3.0.I asked becuase it was riddled with errors and i thought it was becuase of the CPU speed(it would just say 'Divide overflow' every time i would type w-i-n.So HA!

[skywalker[TSG]]

hmmm i once loaded win98SE on a 286/8mhz/2mb

it took 23min to get to the desktop
and when i moved the mouse it took 2min before it responded

[Gene C.]

mostly486
since you already knew the answer to the question you ask in the first place.

maybe you could explaine to myself and microsoft support team how you were able to load it with only 512 memory. and than they should change there support site to read your findings ect.

I have a few systems here in the shop" a couple of them in front of me with 512 k and plain 640 memory. all I have to do is change out the 360/720 floppies to a 1.2 or 1.4 drive" for my windows version's 3.0,3.1 are in that format.

and than either you or myself after it is done will submit the finding and there error to them ect. I will myself pay for all the cost of doing this to them.
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q32/9/05.asp

if you need more of these, plus a screen print out of my error's. you just let me know.

ha, you are the man to set us stright.

[Missing the point]

I got a 386 computer at a garage sale, and it had Win98 already installed! A family, with a 386, and Win 98. I timed it, and it tok 11 min, 30 seconds approx,. to load windows, and get into the desktop. A couply of times, I thought the computer had froze!

How did they use that thing??

[mostly486]

I asked if it would run on a 8086.The computer i have has windows 3.0 with 512K RAM.But it would not start.I thought it could be the processor,but it probably is some incompatability,because back then,i dont think people would spend $ for something that wouldnt work.MS says the minimum amount of ram for win98 is 16 MB,I just now,ran it at 8MB.So what is to say an OS couldnt start
without the extra 128K RAM when a newer one can start without the recomended 8MB?

[zskillz]

I have an anciet 486 DX2, and i have win98SE installed using a program called 98lite...
it's quite impressive, but I've decided that's is slow as **** and it's a waste of space, so I'm gonna try and put Linux on it and learn some of that
Z

[Gene C.]

I think you all ar overlooking the point. he dosen't have enought memory to load it.

Minimum Windows 3.0 configurations
The minimum system configurations to run Windows 3.0 are as follows:

Real Mode
8088 processor, 640KB base memory, CGA/Hercules graphics
Standard Mode
286 processor, 640KB base memory, 256KB extended memory, CGA/Hercules graphics
386 Enhanced Mode
386 processor, 640KB base memory, 1MB extended memory, CGA/Hercules graphics
*****************************************

Minimum Windows 3.1 configurations
The minimum system configurations to run Windows 3.1 are as follows:


Standard Mode
286 processor, 640KB base memory, 256KB extended memory, EGA graphics
386 Enhanced Mode
386 processor, 640KB base memory, 1MB extended memory, EGA graphics
The following are recommended minimum configurations (based on the experiences of many net Windows users) for good performance:


Standard Mode
286/12 processor, 2MB total memory, VGA graphics, mouse
386 Enhanced Mode
386SX/16 processor, 4MB total memory, VGA graphics, mouse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

you can't use a machine with 512 k to load it!!!!!
if you can than I have some here at the shop for you to load it on for me. and you also need to tell microsoft how to do it too.

I always got the message as I stated above. just let me know how to get in touch with you ect?????

[Gene C.]

The computer i have has windows 3.0 with 512K RAM.

this is what I want to know. how do you get it to load and get past the memory error's and setup install I keep getting on my systems ect.

I'm serious about this. I want to know. and than I can get some use out of these old systems for kids window training. I'll wait for you reply. before I mess with the changeing of the systems around.

and I'll also send an e-mail to uncle bill's support team alone with a copy of this post. to show them that there programmers and support team are wrong. and as a large buyer of there products ect.

I want the facts posted stright on there site ect. and I'll post back here what they say in return.

waiting to learn something new from you on this. you might be able to change the whole outlook of running windows on older systems ect.

[mostly486]

your so busy trying to prove me wrong that your missing the point.It wont start at all.It just says 'divide overflow' when i try to start it mabey it is the ram,but mabey it is something eles to.Besides,your not reading what i wrote after the first line.Which is "IT WOULD NOT START"
nor can i prove that it is not the ram because it doesn't get to those ram errors

[This message has been edited by mostly486 (edited 05-23-2000).]

[mattheadfat]

i was thinking of loading win2k on my ti-83 calculator? you think it has enough horse power?

[mostly486]

your name describes you well.If you dont care,or your here just to join the band wagon and try to look all cool by putting your two cents into the conversation,then mabey you should be quiet.

[Gene C.]

your so busy trying to prove me wrong that your missing the point.It wont start at all.

first off. I'm not trying to, prove anybody wrong. are you talking about you get the error's after you have loaded it on the system or what.

what I'm stateing is that I have never even got that far before. it always tells me. I don't have enought memory to load windows ect.

I think we have a very touchie problem here. and you yourself are takeing this the wrong way ect. "" I "" just want to learn how to load it on there.so, for as I can give someone a chance to learn windows at the start. and have a better understanding of how it works. like I said I have some xt's that it won't load on. but, than again I have it loaded on some 286 with no problems ect.

this is not about you or me being right. it is about the helping of others on this board that might want to do the same as you and I want to. for there are a lot of times you get the chance to pick up and old system and don't want to just use dos on it ect.

[mostly486]

Why do you copy&paste every first sentence i say?Anyway,if i had a copy of windowz 3.0,then i could try and reinstall and see if it could happen on this one(because it already is installed),but i dont,so i cant.

[Missing the point]

I gues my name is getting pretty popular eh? http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/wink.gif lol

[Gene C.]

Missing the point
with that statement. I end this. he already has it loaded and that is all he wanted to do in the first place. so it seems to me he answered his own question. and there is no need for me to try and rewrite the support team at uncle bills.

but, I would still like to know how to get past the memory bearer tho. I want to load it on some of my systems.

and the reason I post your first line is. I don't want to get an memory error.

I can no longer post to this topic for I'm getting an memory error. and I can't upgrade my brain to the required amount.

[narayan]

WHATEVER

[Eli]

Can we stop this now?

[mostly486]

it actually stopped a while ago


[This message has been edited by mostly486 (edited 05-24-2000).]

[chipbgt]

This was my reply to Mostly486 in the above closed thread:
http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/006517.html


I am sorry that you felt like I was picking you out or trying to tell you where to post. Like I mentioned I just had some free time to reply to your threads. Its just that when you do have a question that does fit into one of the specific forums, you will usually get a better response by posting there. Perhaps someone who knows about motherboards doesnt care to surf the general forum, and you may miss out on a very helpful answer.

The main reason, however, I suggested you post in the motherboard forum is because you stated in another thread that you KNEW it was not in the right place. I am by no means a moderator but sometimes some things are just obvious. As you noticed, your other threads did get moved, and even this one would have if not for your last outburst.

I hope that my "attitude" doesnt keep you from sysopt. My goal is to help newer members out since we seem to have an outburst of problems lately. I am by no means any better than a newer member, just that I have the benefit of knowing what is expected from the members of sysopt already. So don't worry, it will not be hard for me to refrain from even reading any of your future threads....if you are even allowed to stay here anymore. I do hope someone can help you find the answer to your question though.

[This message has been edited by chipbgt (edited 05-24-2000).]