BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Screenshots Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 0d, 19h, 40m | CPU: 26% | MEM: 1923MB of 3073MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Forum rules


Please read the following rules before posting a download request in this area:

1. Don't post a request if you have under 10 posts as stated on the front page. If you do anyway, it will be deleted without further notice. This also applies to other members: If you see a request by someone with less than 10 posts and it hasn't been deleted yet, please don't reply to it.
2. Don't request for warez or any copyrighted software. Only betas (no matter how old or new) and finals of operating systems and applications that are at least 10 years old and therefore classified as abandonware are allowed to be uploaded to and shared on the BetaArchive FTP server.
3. If you have your own FTP server where you'd like other members to upload what you're looking for to, please don't post its login details in any open forum as that will probably lead to abuse. Post the login details in the Private Servers section instead.
4. Check that we don't already have the file on our FTP servers. If you don't have access to the FTP servers then ask someone who has (a moderator for example).


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Some Bob Versions        Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:28 am 
Reply with quote
Ive read about some bob versions here: http://www.d2ca.org/text/sw-catalogs/so ... 1x2x3x.txt

Code:
- Microsoft Bob 1.0 Plus Pack                    Microsoft Corporation              1995  DMF               3.05MB      1
- Microsoft Bob 1.00 OEM BETA 1A                 Microsoft Corporation              1994  CD-ROM           11.49MB      1
- Microsoft Bob 1.0a & MS Bob 1.0 Plus Pack      Microsoft Corporation              1995  CD-ROM           33.00MB      2
- Microsoft Bob 1.0a Gateway 2000 Edition OEM    Microsoft Corporation              1995  CD-ROM           38.41MB      1
- Microsoft Bob 1.0a OEM                         Microsoft Corporation              1995  CD-ROM           14.34MB      1


may anyone has them? :D


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:59 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:35 pm

Posts
571

Location
United Kingdom
I have a version of MSBOB. Is it possible to get it running on Vista? I tried to, but it wouldn't run properly.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:18 pm 
Reply with quote
squidward_ wrote:
I have a version of MSBOB. Is it possible to get it running on Vista? I tried to, but it wouldn't run properly.


weird, it always worked here for me.


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:42 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:35 pm

Posts
571

Location
United Kingdom
Please could you tell me how I can get it working. Thankyou! :wink:

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:53 pm 
Reply with quote
squidward_ wrote:
Please could you tell me how I can get it working. Thankyou! :wink:

it was pretty hard: install it, start it :P


at least here


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 9:56 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:04 pm

Posts
1022

Location
The Ephemeral between existance and non-existance: AKA "being"

Favourite OS
Rhapsody, BeOS
I think you need the 32bit version of Vista...

_________________
Image
Part Time Troll - HPC Enthusiast - Spelling Master - Old Fart


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:26 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:29 pm

Posts
43

Location
Southampton, UK

Favourite OS
Microsoft Windows Vista x64 SP1
Yeah you would do, it's a 16bit app so won't run in Vista 64bit.

MS BOB 1.00 and 1.00a are on the server. I uploaded the Gateway Edition about a month ago as well so that should be there to.

_________________
We're all gonna die anyway, so what's the point?

Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit, AMD Phenom 9950BE OC to 3.01GHz, 8GB OCZ Platinum 1066MHz, 1TB HDD, BFG nVidia GeForce GTX 285 OC 1GB, SoundBlaster X-Fi Fatal1ty Edition Champion Series


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:48 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:35 pm

Posts
571

Location
United Kingdom
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

BTW, wouldn't the Gateway edition one only work on Gateway PCs?

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:48 pm 
Reply with quote
Staff
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm

Posts
2607

Location
Germany, Earth

Favourite OS
Windows 10
squidward_ wrote:
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

BTW, wouldn't the Gateway edition one only work on Gateway PCs?


Does Adobe Acrobat only work on Adobe PCs?

_________________
MS vNext: Windows 10 ESD Database - Windows 10 Build Labs - Windows 10 Update Archive - Office 2016 Version Tracker - Office Downloader


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 7:51 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:35 pm

Posts
571

Location
United Kingdom
But Adobe isn't a PC manufacturer. When I got Windows 1.0 for Zenith Data systems from the BA server and tried to install it on VPC 2007 SP1, it wouldn't boot from the floppy saying ''No system''.
Do you think it is because it looks for something like a ''tattoo'', (OEM info in the BIOS), and if it can't find that info, it won't install.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:01 pm 
Reply with quote
squidward_ wrote:
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

Your sig is telling otherwise.
According to your sig, you're running Vista Ultimate, AND windows xp X64, which implies you're
dual booting them, and if you're not, then you need to reflect the 2 different systems
in your sig as they're misleading.
Not trying to be picky, but you're certainly hard to keep up with. :|


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:36 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:09 am

Posts
368

Location
Sweden
Dion wrote:
squidward_ wrote:
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

Your sig is telling otherwise.
According to your sig, you're running Vista Ultimate, AND windows xp X64, which implies you're
dual booting them, and if you're not, then you need to reflect the 2 different systems
in your sig as they're misleading.
Not trying to be picky, but you're certainly hard to keep up with. :|


Nothing is implied by his sig. Given that 32-bit windows is the standard, one can safely assume that unless stated otherwise he's running the 32-bit version.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:27 pm 
Reply with quote
ddew wrote:
Dion wrote:
squidward_ wrote:
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

Your sig is telling otherwise.
According to your sig, you're running Vista Ultimate, AND windows xp X64, which implies you're
dual booting them, and if you're not, then you need to reflect the 2 different systems
in your sig as they're misleading.
Not trying to be picky, but you're certainly hard to keep up with. :|


Nothing is implied by his sig. Given that 32-bit windows is the standard, one can safely assume that unless stated otherwise he's running the 32-bit version.

Nothing is implied by his sig now, because he just went & changed it, as i knew he would.
So here's what his sig looked like before he changed it.
As I said above, he's hard to keep up with.

Image


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:52 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:09 am

Posts
368

Location
Sweden
Dion wrote:
ddew wrote:
Dion wrote:
squidward_ wrote:
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

Your sig is telling otherwise.
According to your sig, you're running Vista Ultimate, AND windows xp X64, which implies you're
dual booting them, and if you're not, then you need to reflect the 2 different systems
in your sig as they're misleading.
Not trying to be picky, but you're certainly hard to keep up with. :|


Nothing is implied by his sig. Given that 32-bit windows is the standard, one can safely assume that unless stated otherwise he's running the 32-bit version.

Nothing is implied by his sig now, because he just went & changed it, as i knew he would.
So here's what his sig looked like before he changed it.
As I said above, he's hard to keep up with.


It was the old version I was referring to. There's no mention of a x64 Vista and considering how the standard format for operating systems still is 32-bit it's flawed reasoning to assume it's x64 simply because of a mention of x64 in the context of XP.

Think of it like this, a car normally has four wheels while there are cars with more. If someone then says that they have a car it's safe to assume that it's a four wheel car. Or would you be confused if someone said for instance: "I have a Mercedes and a six-wheeled Range Rover" and think that the Mercedes had six wheels as well?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:57 pm 
Reply with quote
ddew wrote:
Dion wrote:
ddew wrote:
Dion wrote:
squidward_ wrote:
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

Your sig is telling otherwise.
According to your sig, you're running Vista Ultimate, AND windows xp X64, which implies you're
dual booting them, and if you're not, then you need to reflect the 2 different systems
in your sig as they're misleading.
Not trying to be picky, but you're certainly hard to keep up with. :|


Nothing is implied by his sig. Given that 32-bit windows is the standard, one can safely assume that unless stated otherwise he's running the 32-bit version.

Nothing is implied by his sig now, because he just went & changed it, as i knew he would.
So here's what his sig looked like before he changed it.
As I said above, he's hard to keep up with.


It was the old version I was referring to. There's no mention of a x64 Vista and considering how the standard format for operating systems still is 32-bit it's flawed reasoning to assume it's x64 simply because of a mention of x64 in the context of XP.

Think of it like this, a car normally has four wheels while there are cars with more. If someone then says that they have a car it's safe to assume that it's a four wheel car. Or would you be confused if someone said for instance: "I have a Mercedes and a six-wheeled Range Rover" and think that the Mercedes had six wheels as well?


You still missed the point being made about his sig, which said he was
running vista AND XP x64, which implied it was on the same system.
Does vista 32bit run on a 64bit system, I think not.


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:03 pm 
Reply with quote
Dion wrote:
ddew wrote:
Dion wrote:
ddew wrote:
Dion wrote:
squidward_ wrote:
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

Your sig is telling otherwise.
According to your sig, you're running Vista Ultimate, AND windows xp X64, which implies you're
dual booting them, and if you're not, then you need to reflect the 2 different systems
in your sig as they're misleading.
Not trying to be picky, but you're certainly hard to keep up with. :|


Nothing is implied by his sig. Given that 32-bit windows is the standard, one can safely assume that unless stated otherwise he's running the 32-bit version.

Nothing is implied by his sig now, because he just went & changed it, as i knew he would.
So here's what his sig looked like before he changed it.
As I said above, he's hard to keep up with.


It was the old version I was referring to. There's no mention of a x64 Vista and considering how the standard format for operating systems still is 32-bit it's flawed reasoning to assume it's x64 simply because of a mention of x64 in the context of XP.

Think of it like this, a car normally has four wheels while there are cars with more. If someone then says that they have a car it's safe to assume that it's a four wheel car. Or would you be confused if someone said for instance: "I have a Mercedes and a six-wheeled Range Rover" and think that the Mercedes had six wheels as well?


You still missed the point being made about his sig, which said he was
running vista AND XP x64, which implied it was on the same system.
Does vista 32bit run on a 64bit system, I think not.


i dont see any problem there, i mean, vista 32 runs on a 64 bit system, and eg. D:\ is xp 64 and C:\ is vista 32, wheres the problem?


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:05 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:09 am

Posts
368

Location
Sweden
Dion wrote:
ddew wrote:
Dion wrote:
ddew wrote:
Dion wrote:
squidward_ wrote:
I have the 32-bit version of Vista Ultimate, NOT the 64-bit version. :)

Your sig is telling otherwise.
According to your sig, you're running Vista Ultimate, AND windows xp X64, which implies you're
dual booting them, and if you're not, then you need to reflect the 2 different systems
in your sig as they're misleading.
Not trying to be picky, but you're certainly hard to keep up with. :|


Nothing is implied by his sig. Given that 32-bit windows is the standard, one can safely assume that unless stated otherwise he's running the 32-bit version.

Nothing is implied by his sig now, because he just went & changed it, as i knew he would.
So here's what his sig looked like before he changed it.
As I said above, he's hard to keep up with.


It was the old version I was referring to. There's no mention of a x64 Vista and considering how the standard format for operating systems still is 32-bit it's flawed reasoning to assume it's x64 simply because of a mention of x64 in the context of XP.

Think of it like this, a car normally has four wheels while there are cars with more. If someone then says that they have a car it's safe to assume that it's a four wheel car. Or would you be confused if someone said for instance: "I have a Mercedes and a six-wheeled Range Rover" and think that the Mercedes had six wheels as well?


You still missed the point being made about his sig, which said he was
running vista AND XP x64, which implied it was on the same system.
Does vista 32bit run on a 64bit system, I think not.


Ok, now you're scaring me. Is your experience really that limited? x64 CPUs are fully compatible with 32-bit versions of software, in fact almost all x64 capable machines are sold with a 32-bit OS. Go use some google fu and read up on stuff before attempting to parade your opinions as absolute truth.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 7:15 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:47 am

Posts
557

Location
Lismore, NSW, Australia

Favourite OS
Whistler
Dion wrote:
You still missed the point being made about his sig, which said he was
running vista AND XP x64, which implied it was on the same system.
Does vista 32bit run on a 64bit system, I think not.


Did you REALLY just say that? Holy damn I wish that was just a very nicely sarcastic hidden meaning of a joke. :|

And Dion, Squidward changed his sig before to comply with the new rules, no conspiracy there for him to change his spec details.

_________________
Slavic Wog to the Core!

My Mark; Shall you RIP. 15/06/1960 - 11/04/2014


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All views expressed in these forums are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the BetaArchive site owner.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Copyright © 2006-2018

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS