Microsoft won't give us windows 1.00

Discuss MS-DOS, Windows 1, 2 and 3.
Namronia

Post by Namronia »

whats the proof for fake?

edit, im sorry had no time
Last edited by Namronia on Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Andy
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 12622
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Andy »

Namronia wrote:whats the proof for fake?
Err, did you bother to read the thread? A quote was found on the site we go it from stating it was a fake. Please learn to read threads.

Tootles
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 984
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Post by Tootles »

Sorry again people. I didn't think it'd wind you up the way it evidently did.

However, just out of interest, have other fakes in the past been as thorough as mine? I'm just wondering that because I've never before seen one in which all the version numbers througout all the files has been changed.
Have a day.

Andy
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 12622
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Andy »

marktuson wrote:Sorry again people. I didn't think it'd wind you up the way it evidently did.

However, just out of interest, have other fakes in the past been as thorough as mine? I'm just wondering that because I've never before seen one in which all the version numbers througout all the files has been changed.
None that I know of which is why we thought we had finally found it when infact we hadn't and it was just a big joke.

Koptor
FTP Access
Posts: 186
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: Lincolnshire UK

Post by Koptor »

marktuson wrote:Sorry again people. I didn't think it'd wind you up the way it evidently did.

However, just out of interest, have other fakes in the past been as thorough as mine? I'm just wondering that because I've never before seen one in which all the version numbers througout all the files has been changed.
Quite possibly, though most were just badly named archives. What I will say is how your little fake or whatever you want to call it showed how gullible everyone is - as I've previously said, 1.00 has been searched for for years and years, I don't think it'd suddenly appear on a public website for download and I'd instantly suggest it was fake and dismiss it...

Nice one from me
lol, internet

Skyfrog
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:45 pm
Location: United States

Post by Skyfrog »

I'm much less annoyed about you making a fake Windows 1.00 than I am about you using the word lulz.

Rhade™
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Germania
Contact:

Post by Rhade™ »

w0h00 better then the the big whoop

Yeah

Koptor
FTP Access
Posts: 186
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: Lincolnshire UK

Post by Koptor »

Skyfrog wrote:I'm much less annoyed about you making a fake Windows 1.00 than I am about you using the word lulz.
He didn't use lulz, I did

And yeah, its all part of being an ebaums warrior I guess really, I should troll less.
lol, internet

jlp09550

Post by jlp09550 »

Oof, I wish I would have known that a month ago.. that ya'll were searching for that.. since I still has a Windows 1.00 system. It was genuine, indeed. Over 10 years old.. so I couldn't have used it.

compact-mac
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 5:55 pm
Location: /bin/bash
Contact:

Post by compact-mac »

The ORIGINAL 1.00? Not 1.01 or anything?
CM's Old Website
Post Tenebras Spero Lucem
Forget DNS/HTTPS or DNS/TLS, the future is DNS over Avian.

jlp09550

Post by jlp09550 »

Compact-mac wrote:The ORIGINAL 1.00? Not 1.01 or anything?
Yeah, 1.00. I remember looking at the about page. I never found any use for it, as I tried to install software and it failed to cooperate with doing so.

compact-mac
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 5:55 pm
Location: /bin/bash
Contact:

Post by compact-mac »

jlp09550 wrote:
Compact-mac wrote:The ORIGINAL 1.00? Not 1.01 or anything?
Yeah, 1.00. I remember looking at the about page. I never found any use for it, as I tried to install software and it failed to cooperate with doing so.
Can you upload it, or get a screenshot?
CM's Old Website
Post Tenebras Spero Lucem
Forget DNS/HTTPS or DNS/TLS, the future is DNS over Avian.

jlp09550

Post by jlp09550 »

Compact-mac wrote:
jlp09550 wrote:
Compact-mac wrote:The ORIGINAL 1.00? Not 1.01 or anything?
Yeah, 1.00. I remember looking at the about page. I never found any use for it, as I tried to install software and it failed to cooperate with doing so.
Can you upload it, or get a screenshot?
Like I said above, I got rid of that system on EBay like a month ago.
A little less than half o the part of the system itself (not hard drive) got submerged in Hurricane Rita water, so only the HD was of value.

compact-mac
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 5:55 pm
Location: /bin/bash
Contact:

Post by compact-mac »

jlp09550 wrote:
Compact-mac wrote:
jlp09550 wrote:
Compact-mac wrote:The ORIGINAL 1.00? Not 1.01 or anything?
Yeah, 1.00. I remember looking at the about page. I never found any use for it, as I tried to install software and it failed to cooperate with doing so.
Can you upload it, or get a screenshot?
Like I said above, I got rid of that system on EBay like a month ago.
A little less than half o the part of the system itself (not hard drive) got submerged in Hurricane Rita water, so only the HD was of value.
Oh, sorry, it was a shame, that would have been of some value...

Who knows. We should check ebay every now and again ( I mean all ebays, UK, USA, all countries) to see if 1.00 comes up...
CM's Old Website
Post Tenebras Spero Lucem
Forget DNS/HTTPS or DNS/TLS, the future is DNS over Avian.

hounsell

Post by hounsell »

It would probably be generally a waste of money...
If Windows 1.00 did have the bug and was recalled, i really doubt there would be any copies in circulation, but you would end up with a large amount of windows '1.00' copies that were really 1.01, 1.02, etc

Koptor
FTP Access
Posts: 186
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: Lincolnshire UK

Post by Koptor »

jlp09550 wrote:Oof, I wish I would have known that a month ago.. that ya'll were searching for that.. since I still has a Windows 1.00 system. It was genuine, indeed. Over 10 years old.. so I couldn't have used it.
LIES.

Pics or it didn't happen.
lol, internet

srstakey

Post by srstakey »

Koptor wrote:
jlp09550 wrote:Oof, I wish I would have known that a month ago.. that ya'll were searching for that.. since I still has a Windows 1.00 system. It was genuine, indeed. Over 10 years old.. so I couldn't have used it.
LIES.

Pics or it didn't happen.
Hmm...should have been a little more than over 10 years ago, too.

4tified
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 725
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:16 am
Location: TeXaS

Post by 4tified »

I'm so ready to say this is fake, yet a part of me wants to know for sure... Here we go..
Laptop: Precision M6300 2.4GHz Core 2 T8300 / 4GB RAM / 320GB HD / ATI Quadro FX 3600m
Server: PowerEdge 1950 (Gen III) (x1) 2.5Ghz Xeon E5420 / 24GB FB-DDR2 / 1.5tb 7.2k SAS RAID 0
Desktop: Precision T5500 2.66GHz Xeon X5650 / 24GB DDR3 ECC / 2x 300GB Seagate 15k7

moonlit
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:02 pm

Post by moonlit »

4tified wrote:I'm so ready to say this is fake, yet a part of me wants to know for sure... Here we go..
I vote fake, the "last modified" datestamps show 14/01/2007 (just after 2pm) on all the .lgo files in disk 2. All other datestamps appear to match 1.01.

Edit: I just realised it's the same URL as previously and we already know that's fake...

AnDrEwP182
FTP Access
Posts: 342
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:53 pm
Location: Saint-Henri, Montréal, Québec

Post by AnDrEwP182 »

/throws link at some random people on other forums for the fun of it

Frozenport
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 1022
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:04 pm
Location: The Ephemeral between existance and non-existance: AKA "being"
Contact:

Post by Frozenport »

Darn it, I checked my e-mail for this?

Wasn't there a stick for "no windows 1.00 threads" or was that OSBA...
Image
Part Time Troll - HPC Enthusiast - Spelling Master - Old Fart

beta4me

Post by beta4me »

hey guys, I have Windows 1.00 x86 Original 1986. Unfortunately not the disk images, but I have all the files, so it won't boot though. They also all seem to check out for the last modified timestamp. If you want it let me know...

Tootles
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 984
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Post by Tootles »

1986 would make Windows 1.01 an anachronism, because it came out in 1985.
Have a day.

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

Can we please stop that "I have Windows 1.00, sure!" stuff now?

moonlit
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:02 pm

Post by moonlit »

empireum wrote:Can we please stop that "I have Windows 1.00, sure!" stuff now?
QFE... I personally believe it's never going to be found (or that it possible didn't even exist), and people spewing out fakes left and right isn't gonna help anyone, it's just going to irritate people and if it ever does get found no-one's going to be interested. Let's just throw it in the same bit bucket as Neptune 5000 and be done with it.

Post Reply