BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Screenshots Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 0d, 8h, 11m | CPU: 32% | MEM: 2319MB of 3537MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Windows NT 1?        Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:22 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Posts
969

Favourite OS
First Edition UNIX
I know I've posted about this before, but I've actually had a much better idea - not involving recoding OS/2:).

The idea I've had is to get a copy of Windows Premiere Edition and MS-DOS 3.21 (or so), and change the identification in both to "Microsoft Windows NT version 1.0," and get rid of the 'blibbet' Microsoft logo and replace it with a more NT-ish bootscreen (perhaps get rid of that altogether, and have this as a small program) that displays

Code:
Mircosoft(R) Windows NT(TM) version 1.00 (build 12)
* KB RAM, 8086 kernel


* Have a little program that identifies the amount of RAM in KB?

Also, perhaps we could add new drivers to the setup to include VGA displays (I'm sure it can be done), and the Windows 2 mouse driver, etc...

What do you think?

PS. I thought od Windows Premiere because the version string is longer, and so it'd be easier to replace "Premiere Edition" with "NT version 1.00 ".

I just think that'd be so cool to do :>.

_________________
Have a day.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:01 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:26 pm

Posts
929
What would be the bloody point?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:35 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Posts
969

Favourite OS
First Edition UNIX
What's the point in hacking around with Windows anyway? What's the point?

Because I want to.

_________________
Have a day.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:58 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:26 pm

Posts
929
All you are doing is changing strings to things that are deliberately set to cause confusion. I could understand if you were making something like "marktuson Windows eXtreme" or something, but "Windows NT 1.0"...? Flat out stupid.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 1:42 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am

Posts
1915

Location
New Zealand
someone got up on the wrong side of the bed.......


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:37 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Posts
969

Favourite OS
First Edition UNIX
Heh. We know that Windows NT started at 3.1 (or possibly 3.0, according to some sources). I just want to do it because it would be cool.

_________________
Have a day.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 2:20 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
RentedMule wrote:
All you are doing is changing strings to things that are deliberately set to cause confusion. I could understand if you were making something like "marktuson Windows eXtreme" or something, but "Windows NT 1.0"...? Flat out stupid.


He, its his choise to do it.
The sub-forum is called CUSTOM Operating Systems.

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:06 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:26 pm

Posts
929
Just because he "chooses" to do it, doesn't make it a good idea. Just think about the Windows 1.0 fiasco. People who were "informed" knew how/when/where to look to see if it was a fake. There was a whole bunch of people who didn't. It is almost like he is "choosing" to do this to capitalize on anyone without the knowledge to know such a version never existed.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 2:54 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:57 am

Posts
400
RentedMule wrote:
Just because he "chooses" to do it, doesn't make it a good idea. Just think about the Windows 1.0 fiasco. People who were "informed" knew how/when/where to look to see if it was a fake. There was a whole bunch of people who didn't. It is almost like he is "choosing" to do this to capitalize on anyone without the knowledge to know such a version never existed.

Stop.

First off, I think it is an interesting idea, because we have never seen Windows 1.0, 2.0, or even 3.0 in NT-based form, just MS-DOS 9x form. Even if he isn't going for this approach, I know exactly how he is feeling.

Second off, are you calling custom hacks bad ideas? Because as the creator of Windows AlphaBetas, I had good intentions coming utilizing every element of the Microsoft Windows operating system. Many probably thought it was a dumb idea, either because of its title, or because of the fact that most it was impossible to recreate. But that is where your heart and devotion come into play to show what you are capable of doing.

Let's say, Ford wants to reinvent the Model T car with the latest features. Would you call that a bad idea, or brilliant? I think it would sell.

Hell, I feel like reinventing Macintosh System Software 1.0 from 1984. Back when everything was simple.

_________________
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.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:27 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:40 am

Posts
1513
offtopic: I wonder what would the first build (build #1) of windows be like?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:44 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Posts
969

Favourite OS
First Edition UNIX
I imagine it would have been more like OS/2 than Windows. Possibly just a command line, too.

_________________
Have a day.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:51 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Posts
969

Favourite OS
First Edition UNIX
Ahaa..

I wonder, did OS/2 1.0 support DOS fully?

Perhaps I could go the using that as the base, since NT is OS/2-based in the first place.

All I'm trying to do, anyway, is just try and come up with something different.

When I get home later, I'll see if setting Windows 1 up with VGA drivers is actually possible.

_________________
Have a day.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:04 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 1:25 am

Posts
590

Location
Israel
marktuson wrote:
I imagine it would have been more like OS/2 than Windows. Possibly just a command line, too.

As Windows started as a GUI for DOS, I doubt that. Besides, the only version of OS/2 that didn't have a GUI was 1.0. 1.1 (which was released less than a year after 1.0) had Presentation Manager, which (at the time) looked almost like Windows 2.1.

marktuson wrote:
I wonder, did OS/2 1.0 support DOS fully?

OS/2 Warp has almost complete DOS support (including VGA emulation and everything; it can even boot DOS from a floppy in a window), and it also runs Windows 3.x applications. I'm not sure about 1.x, though. I know it switches to real mode in order to run DOS applications, but I'm not sure how complete its emulation is. AFAIK Text-mode applications run fine, but since 1.x uses 286 protected mode, OS/2 applications pause when running a DOS application, and IIRC you can run only one DOS application at a time.

Oh, and in OS/2 1.x, DOS applications can crash the system (becuase they're run in real mode).


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 11:49 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Posts
969

Favourite OS
First Edition UNIX
More thoughts:

If I use MS-DOS 3 as the base for the thing, I think that'd be better.
What I'm going to do is set up a standard Windows Premiere install, with the Windows 2 mouse drivers and VGA driver (do this, I think, by selecting 'other' and then inserting Windows 2 'Displays' diskette).

I'll then write my own setup program, and make my own disk set. This way, I can include other programs too.

Idea: networking - would networking be feasible, include some generic networking drivers and tools (like telnet) that can run in DOS. I may stretch to DOS 5 (at the highest) if that's required for networking capability.

Question: can anyone tell me how to copy files and set text/background colours in C++, and can I have autoexec.bat as a hidden file, but still auto-exec'ed?

_________________
Have a day.


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 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