Windows 1.x-2.x were Intel and 100% compatible only (including AMD 286 since
it was manufactured under license by Intel), and ran without problems on the
NEC V20 (8088 clone). Bear in mind that there wasn't really any secondary
CPU market at that time.
Windows 3.x was also supported on IBM Blue Lightning and AMD processors.
Windows 95 logo program lists the following chipsets:
- AMD Enhanced Am486
- AMD Am5x86
- AMD K5
- AMD K6
- Centaur IDT-C6
- Cyrix 486DRx2
- Cyrix 5x86
- Cyrix 6x86 & 6x86MX
- IBM 6x86 & 6x86MX
- NexGen NX586
- SGS-Thomson ST486
- SGS-Thomson 6x86
- Texas Instruments TI486DX2 & DX4
Windows NT 3.51 supported Intel, MIPS, Alpha, and PowerPC.
Windows NT 4.0 supports Intel and Alpha.
Windows CE 2.0 supports the following chipsets:
- AMD
- ARM
- Digital
- Hitachi
- MIPS
- Motorola
Kai
-----Original Message-----
From: Ward Donald Griffiths III [mailto:gram@cnct.com]
Sent: Monday, May 18, 1998 9:18 PM
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
Subject: Re: Windows 1.x platforms...
Hotze wrote:
OK... I know that Windows 1.x/2.x was horibbly unsuccessful... but I
remember reading about some platforms that Windows was ported to that
seemed
pretty strange... (IE non-x86).
Anyone???
Nope, nein, none. While (16-bit and under) Windows can be used with
other processors _now_ courtesy of WABI, WINE and other independent
projects, only NT has ever been officially supported by Microsoft on
any non-Intel (or "clone" -- though MS's support is questionable in
that case) CPU. And support for NT on non-Intel processors has been
dropping and is not promised for the future. (Then again, support for
any Microsoft product can't be counted upon a year after release or
release of the the next version, whichever comes earlier).
--
Ward Griffiths
They say that politics makes strange bedfellows.
Of course, the main reason they cuddle up is to screw somebody else.
Michael Flynn, _Rogue Star_