BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Screenshots Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 0d, 11h, 27m | CPU: 33% | MEM: 2295MB of 3701MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Is Windows 2.0 is success or flop?        Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:08 am 
Reply with quote
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 23, 2015 5:52 pm

Posts
144

Location
State of Georgia USA

Favourite OS
MS-DOS 5.00.224 Beta
There was another topic about Windows 1.0 this is about Windows 2.0. Windows 2.00 is first windows to have overlapping windows. Windows 2.00 is first Windows move icons freely a round screen. Window 2.00 is first Windows sold over millions copies. Windows 2.00 is first Windows v86 mode via Windows 386 2.01 and Windows 386 2.03. My opinion is Windows 2.0 is success not a flop.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Is Windows 2.0 is success or flop?        Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:21 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 pm

Posts
1381

Location
SE Asia

Favourite OS
MS-DOS 3.30a & Windows/386!
I think the real thing of measure is a success in terms of what?

2.x was a significant improvement from 1.x, I'm sure it sold more in terms of retail/OEM bundle, and application bundles (the Windows 2.x runtime), but technically even though Windows/386 was incredibly impressive the fundamentals of remaining in realmode was still a major barrier to Windows 2.

The larger problem was the proliferation of 80286 based machines. The whole derailment of OS/2 from being available for the 386 with 386 based features basically killed OS/2 before it even got a start. Windows wasn't subject to the same IBM based insanity and thusly Microsoft were free to charge significantly less for the SDK's and to peruse 386 specific features.

2.0/2.1/2.11 basically had laid the foundation that Windows was strong enough for apps like Excel, Word, Aldus Pagemaker, Corel Draw and many more.

It was because of the success of Windows 2, and IBM's refusal to let Microsoft make Windows the UI for OS/2 that had given Microsoft enough confidence that those hard fought for Windows applications by Microsoft and other 3rd parties were worth fighting for, and what started the Windows 3.0 revolution which lead to NT OS/2 becoming Windows NT, and the disbandment by Microsoft of OS/2 after 1.21. And this is why OS/2 was later plagued as half finished for the 2.00 launch, along with still having a fundamentally 16bit kernel with 16bit device drivers. IBM was out of their league to do anything productive with OS/2, while Microsoft had only marketplace to grow and take over with Windows 3.0 on the low end, and Windows NT on the Midrange.

Running Windows 2 in protected mode started almost immediately after the launch party of Windows 2, but by making Windows able to scale to the memory power of the 80286 & 80386 processors without a new operating system, Windows would be unstoppable.

As a side note, prior to the release of DOS4G/W, DOS extenders were VERY expensive, and building applications for Windows was actually much cheaper.

_________________
"Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." – Henry Spencer


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Is Windows 2.0 is success or flop?        Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:50 pm 
Reply with quote
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 23, 2015 5:52 pm

Posts
144

Location
State of Georgia USA

Favourite OS
MS-DOS 5.00.224 Beta
Windows 2.00 did laid foundation more than Windows 3.0. Windows 3.0 is repaint version Windows 2.00 with more apps and protected mode.
Windows 2.00 start from ground up than Windows 3.00. Windows 3.00 was massive success what killed OS/2 in end. Actuality Windows 2.00 what killed OS/2 from start. Windows 2.01/386 have V86 mode inside command prompt. While OS/2 1.00 slush Intel 286 prison box. What actuality kill OS/2 sells from start. OS/2 1.00 did not have a GUI but OS/2 1.1 did have GUI. Windows 2.00 GUI called Presentation Manager because IBM want Windows 2.0 users move to OS/2 that never happen. From OS/2 1.10. Because IBM want Microsoft to kill Windows and Microsoft said no. The last Windows post be Windows 2.0 that never happen Microsoft did continue Windows after Windows 2.00.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Is Windows 2.0 is success or flop?        Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 9:16 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:33 pm

Posts
1709

Location
Czechia

Favourite OS
MinWin
johnlemon647 wrote:
Windows 2.00 did laid foundation more than Windows 3.0. Windows 3.0 is repaint version Windows 2.00 with more apps and protected mode.

That's not right. Even though Windows 2.x did introduce features that were key in the success of Windows 3.0 such as the virtual machine manager, it's still the ability to run applications in protected mode and therefore the possibility to access more than 640 KB of memory that made it the success that it was.

_________________
Image
AlphaBeta, stop brainwashing me immediately!


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Is Windows 2.0 is success or flop?        Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2018 2:12 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 pm

Posts
1381

Location
SE Asia

Favourite OS
MS-DOS 3.30a & Windows/386!
AlphaBeta wrote:
johnlemon647 wrote:
Windows 2.00 did laid foundation more than Windows 3.0. Windows 3.0 is repaint version Windows 2.00 with more apps and protected mode.

That's not right. Even though Windows 2.x did introduce features that were key in the success of Windows 3.0 such as the virtual machine manager, it's still the ability to run applications in protected mode and therefore the possibility to access more than 640 KB of memory that made it the success that it was.


Exactly. Until Windows 3.0 the average person with a 286 or 386 basically had no way to take advantage of it for productivity software.

Considering Geos dates back to 1986, it's amazing to have gone from 8bit productivity to 16bit protected mode on 4 short years.

And thanks to the platform hell of no standards for high speed graphics a sound it was inevitable that Windows would eventually become the platform of choice for games

Windows 2 got Microsoft the apps it so wanted, and 3.0 gave them the benefits of OS/2 without having users touch their operating systems. Just as 3.0 gave way to 3.1 which served as the #1 workhorse and became the bridge to desktop 32bit OS's with Win32s for those who didn't have a machine strong enough for Windows NT.

_________________
"Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." – Henry Spencer


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Is Windows 2.0 is success or flop?        Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:10 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:50 pm

Posts
969

Favourite OS
First Edition UNIX
johnlemon647 wrote:
Windows 2.00 did laid foundation more than Windows 3.0. Windows 3.0 is repaint version Windows 2.00 with more apps and protected mode.
Windows 2.00 start from ground up than Windows 3.00. Windows 3.00 was massive success what killed OS/2 in end. Actuality Windows 2.00 what killed OS/2 from start. Windows 2.01/386 have V86 mode inside command prompt. While OS/2 1.00 slush Intel 286 prison box. What actuality kill OS/2 sells from start. OS/2 1.00 did not have a GUI but OS/2 1.1 did have GUI. Windows 2.00 GUI called Presentation Manager because IBM want Windows 2.0 users move to OS/2 that never happen. From OS/2 1.10. Because IBM want Microsoft to kill Windows and Microsoft said no. The last Windows post be Windows 2.0 that never happen Microsoft did continue Windows after Windows 2.00.
This is really difficult to understand.

At the end of the day, Windows 2 was a success - if it hadn't been, there would have been no point in carrying on to 3.

Also OS/2's Presentation Manager for Windows 2 would rock as much as a port of Program Manager.

_________________
Have a day.


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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:  
cron

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