Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th Jul 2012 18:39 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 526060
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Windows 3.0 was just like Windows 3.1 only with features missing and a lot more bugs.
The good thing was that it did run on a 286 with 1 MB of RAM, IIIRC 3.1 needed a 386 and 2 MB.
The big problem I had with 3.0 and 3.1 that when one application crashed the rest was bound to also blow up.
People may not like 9x, ME and Vista (pre SP1), but they were much better than 3.0 and 3.1 (leaving 3.11 out on purpose).
Windows 3.0 was just like Windows 3.1 only with features missing and a lot more bugs.
True, for the most part.
The good thing was that it did run on a 286 with 1 MB of RAM, IIIRC 3.1 needed a 386 and 2 MB.
3.0 was the only version to support all three operating modes: real, standard, and 386 enhanced. Real could run on an 8088 with 640Kb of memory. It also provided great compatibility with real mode Windows 2.x applications, which was effectively removed from 3.1.
I know it's impossible to really go back, but I have a soft spot for 3.0 - it's the first one I developed for, and I still have the SDK manuals on my shelf.






Member since:
2005-12-04
What was so bad about 3.0?