13 Nov
1998
13 Nov
'98
10:17 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) <cisin(a)xenosoft.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Saturday, 14 November 1998 10:11
Subject: Minimum hardware requirements (Was: Old, but not "Classic"
On Fri, 13 Nov 1998, Charles Oblender wrote:
in real mode, yes, have a friend who still has
one
with it installed.
I've seen a 286 that ran Windows 3.0 pretty
well.
An 8088 XT will run Windows 3.00 An 80286 AT can also do 3.10
and 3.11 as well.
In Standard mode.
Again, a friend has an NEC compatible with 6mb of ram
and Win 3.11 installed. Works pretty well actually.
An 80386SX can do Windoze95
I have done this. It does work. But it is VERY slow.
Microsoft don't recommend it, since 95 is optimised for
32 bit all the way. But it's possible, if you are a masochist.
3.0 can run with CGA.
3.x (.0 .1 &.11) can use EGA, CGA and even Hercules, I've done the EGA &
CGA, not
tried Hercules, but the drivers are on Microsofts Windows 3.x Driver library
site.
3.10 SUPPOSEDLY can use the 3.0 CGA drivers, but they
don't always work;
Seems to be card dependent. But it does work on many.
3.1 therefore needs EGA
I've never tried below VGA for Windoze95
EGA is allegedly possible, but I've never tried it. I believe it involves
using
3.x drivers or some other ugliness. But it is supposed to be possible.
I don't know what the mimimum RAM requirements are,
but my 486 NEC laptop
can only handle "safe mode". (It has a hardware problem that prevents
upgrading the memory)
NB: MINIMUM requirements are NOT to be confused with
RECOMMENDED
configuration. Particularly when it gets to issues of "acceptable
performance".
This is the major impediment. Like the 386SX running 95. It worked, but it
was
such a slug that we put 3.11 back on it after 2 days of tinkering. That
improved it's
performance significantly. I have seen a 386DX40 running Win95. It was a
little slow,
but still useable.
Cheers
Geoff
Computer Room Internet Cafe
Port Pirie
South Australia.
netcafe(a)pirie.mtx.net.au
12 Nov
12 Nov
2 p.m.
Computer Room Internet Cafe wrote:>3.0 can run with CGA.
3.x (.0 .1 &.11) can use EGA, CGA and even
Hercules, I've done the EGA &
CGA, not
tried Hercules, but the drivers are on Microsofts Windows 3.x Driver library
site.
Herc works great for Win3.x all the way to 3.11 and WorkGroups. CGA is 2 color
and looks like a Mac Classic with blocky graphics. The CGA driver is separate
3.10 SUPPOSEDLY can use the 3.0 CGA drivers, but
they don't always work;
Seems to be card dependent. But it does work on many.
from the install package, not included or recommended.
Mono/MDA will not work on
any as MDA doesn't do graphics. Herc, EGA and VGA
drivers come with all versions
of Windows 3.x
>3.1 therefore needs EGA
>I've never tried below VGA for Windoze95
3.1 does not need EGA but it is nice. Win95 refuses to work in EGA, not enough
colors or resolutuion. Been there, tried that many times. VGA monitors go for
$125 or less NEW anymore anyway.
EGA is allegedly possible, but I've never tried it. I believe it involves
using
3.x drivers or some other ugliness. But it is supposed to be possible.
>I don't know what the mimimum RAM requirements are, but my 486 NEC laptop
>can only handle "safe mode". (It has a hardware problem that prevents
>upgrading the memory)
Win95 will not even start without a minimum of 4mb RAM. Although it recognizes
the drivers from 3.x (such as the internal speaker driver to hear the WAV files
without a sound card) it refuses to install on a system wi thout a VGA 640x480,
16 color display and card. Ths of course means a 512k VGA card in most cases, or
a mono VGA card.
9541
days inactive
9540
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
netcafe＠pirie.mtx.net.au -
rhblake＠bigfoot.com