Why Windows 1.00 was pulled from shelves

Discuss MS-DOS, Windows 1, 2 and 3.
cooled
FTP Access
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:00 pm

Why Windows 1.00 was pulled from shelves

Post by cooled »

The real reason that this thing was pulled was because of a major bug. The bug is that when you would do dir /p it would delete everything after the first page. This was a programming error when del was switched with a little code from dir /p. this is the reason why windows 1.00 was pulled.

Andy
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 12628
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Andy »

I knew it was because of a bug but I never knew what the bug was. Now I do

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

Post by empireum »

Where would they have done this error? The only place where this could have occurred is command.com that contains all the built-in DOS commands, and this file entirely belongs to DOS, it has nothing to do with Windows 1.0x. or its "MS-DOS window" msdos.exe because this uses the DOS interpreter as well AFAIK.

___
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by ___ »

is there a source for this? Wikipedia states that it was a keyboard problem (i think)

But was 1.00 ever actually released?

cooled
FTP Access
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by cooled »

fyi i have installed 1.00 to actually report this.

Andy
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 12628
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Andy »

cooled wrote:fyi i have installed 1.00 to actually report this.
I doubt it. 1.00 has never been found. If you DO have a copy please share.

cooled
FTP Access
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by cooled »

i will share it in due time but for now im hiding this in a safe.

Andy
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 12628
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Andy »

cooled wrote:i will share it in due time but for now im hiding this in a safe.
And why are you keeping it safe? This is a sharing community, thats the point of sharing these betas to keep them alive and around.

Beta Freak
FTP Access
Posts: 786
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:05 am

Post by Beta Freak »

Is it a boxed version?
If it is could you take a pic of it?

cooled
FTP Access
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by cooled »

its not boxed

Andy
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 12628
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Andy »

Beta Freak wrote:Is it a boxed version?
If it is could you take a pic of it?
I have an outside source who says his claim is total crap. However, he can prove us wrong by sharing it.

Remember, what you give you shall receive. Its only fair to share your things in return for letting you download from the FTP.

Beta Freak
FTP Access
Posts: 786
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:05 am

Post by Beta Freak »

cooled wrote:its not boxed
Still, could we see a pic of the disk?

___
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by ___ »

i lol at this thread

pr0gram the pr0grammer
Donator
Posts: 698
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:05 pm
Location: Or-stray-liagh

Post by pr0gram the pr0grammer »

Can you post file dates and the CGA.LGO file please?

*looks back at the old OSBA "Windows 1.0 Discoveries" page*
If anyone believes they have found Windows 1.0 then they should take the followng steps before posting their discovery:

1. Open up the Windows 1.0 archive and find CGA.LGO
2. Open CGA.LGO and search for "1.01, 1.02, 1.03, or 1.04". If any of those version numbers are found in CGA.LGO then you have a fake.
3. If you did NOT find those version numbers then please make a post here on the forums stating that you followed the procedure and could not verify it as being false.\.\
pr0gram the pr0grammer
BetaArchive retiree | OSBA Expat

ddrmaxromance
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 400
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:57 am

Post by ddrmaxromance »

Fake. The only way to prove you have something is to reveal. I could say "OMGs! I have Windows 3.15 you guys!" and it could just be a Paint job.

You want us to believe you? Take pictures, send us a copy of the CGA.LGO file, or even take a picture of the disk. Teh internet is full of lies, and message board text proves it.
Since January 2005, I've been in the Operating Systems Prototype Community. I've enjoyed learning more these past four years about the development of the Windows and Macintosh operating systems, as well as learning of new user-based projects that optimize system performance.

___
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by ___ »

pr0gram the pr0grammer wrote:Can you post file dates and the CGA.LGO file please?

*looks back at the old OSBA "Windows 1.0 Discoveries" page*
If anyone believes they have found Windows 1.0 then they should take the followng steps before posting their discovery:

1. Open up the Windows 1.0 archive and find CGA.LGO
2. Open CGA.LGO and search for "1.01, 1.02, 1.03, or 1.04". If any of those version numbers are found in CGA.LGO then you have a fake.
3. If you did NOT find those version numbers then please make a post here on the forums stating that you followed the procedure and could not verify it as being false.\.\
heh, i have recently visited that page to check out a few other '1.00's. Maybe we should enforce that rule here

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 »

I reccomend you leak it, or send it me to do the diry work . It is very hard for me to believe without any proof.
Image
Part Time Troll - HPC Enthusiast - Spelling Master - Old Fart

unblestone

Post by unblestone »

troyoda1990 wrote:Fake.
You want us to believe you? Take pictures, send us a copy of the CGA.LGO file, or even take a picture of the disk. Teh internet is full of lies, and message board text proves it.
Sending CGA.LGO or any other file will be of no use, it is easy for
people to hex edit sections & release it, as have seen before
Unless you have a 16 bit compiler to check header its a waste without
complete package.

Antz
FTP Access
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:52 pm
Location: Austria

Post by Antz »

troyoda1990 wrote:Fake. The only way to prove you have something is to reveal. I could say "OMGs! I have Windows 3.15 you guys!" and it could just be a Paint job.

You want us to believe you? Take pictures, send us a copy of the CGA.LGO file, or even take a picture of the disk. Teh internet is full of lies, and message board text proves it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_3.15
this one ?

cooled
FTP Access
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by cooled »

pr0gram the pr0grammer wrote:Can you post file dates and the CGA.LGO file please?

*looks back at the old OSBA "Windows 1.0 Discoveries" page*
If anyone believes they have found Windows 1.0 then they should take the followng steps before posting their discovery:

1. Open up the Windows 1.0 archive and find CGA.LGO
2. Open CGA.LGO and search for "1.01, 1.02, 1.03, or 1.04". If any of those version numbers are found in CGA.LGO then you have a fake.
3. If you did NOT find those version numbers then please make a post here on the forums stating that you followed the procedure and could not verify it as being false.\.\
ok i did that and there is no 1.01, 1.02, 1.03, 1.04

Andy
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 12628
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Andy »

Could you please post a link to, or upload this version so we can check?

___
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by ___ »

interesting. This could make a good release for betaarchive

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 »

I reccomend you don't release it with any haxor branding, just place it somewhere and say *here* is the download link... That way people who want it will find it
Image
Part Time Troll - HPC Enthusiast - Spelling Master - Old Fart

Vista Ultimate R2
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:06 pm

Post by Vista Ultimate R2 »

___ wrote:interesting. This could make a good release for betaarchive
Assuming it's real...
Image

___
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by ___ »

Frozenport wrote:I reccomend you don't release it with any haxor branding, just place it somewhere and say *here* is the download link... That way people who want it will find it
like 3683?

Post Reply