Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Windows 1.0: The flop that created an empire


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 21-11-2013, 11:37
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,236

Windows 1.0: The flop that created an empire

"Two years later than planned, Microsoft's new graphical operating system went on sale November 20, 1985. It wasn't worth the wait. But a bigger story was soon to unfold."

Reminds me of the latest W8/W8.1/Surface drama to be honest.
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 21-11-2013, 12:20
xp95
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: At the bottom of the staircase
Posts: 2,406
I never knew Windows 1.0 had been a flop....
xp95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 12:27
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,236
The first one I used was Windows 3.1 I think.
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 13:21
stu0rt
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 934
I've seen/used Windows 2.0 on a very old PC that a friend had at uni in the early 90s. My first install of Windows on my own PC was 3.0, which I think came on about 7 floppy disks! Plus another 3 disks for MSDOS that had to be installed first.
stu0rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 13:36
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 51,198
I never used Windows 1.0. Earliest Windows I used was 3.1. I've also used 95, 98, NT4, 2000, XP, the dreaded Vista and 7. I saw some pics of Windows 1.0 though, it looked terrible but still better than Windows 8 Ever seen this advert for it? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk
cnbcwatcher is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 13:42
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,236
Almost 30 years later and Balmer is still as hyper as back then
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 14:59
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 51,198
Almost 30 years later and Balmer is still as hyper as back then
Yep One thing I don't get about it though - why was Windows 1.0 not available in Nebraska?
cnbcwatcher is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:09
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,236
Yep One thing I don't get about it though - why was Windows 1.0 not available in Nebraska?
http://www.quora.com/Microsoft-Histo...Windows-1-0-ad
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:19
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 66,775
Ha-ha! A 30MB HDD. Unless they just used memory back then. That OS looks absolutely basic. No life to it whatsoever.
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:21
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 66,775
The first one I used was Windows 3.1 I think.
I was very late in the computing world with XP being my first OS.
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:24
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 51,198
Ha-ha! A 30MB HDD. Unless they just used memory back then. That OS looks absolutely basic. No life to it whatsoever.
I know. It has all the charisma of a wet fish. At least the Mac OS back then (and even now!) had a bit of life to it.
cnbcwatcher is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:39
JeffG1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Newbury
Posts: 4,868
I was very late in the computing world with XP being my first OS.
Probably due to being very late into the world itself
JeffG1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:50
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 66,775
Probably due to being very late into the world itself
Wrong assumption.
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:53
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 66,775
I know. It has all the charisma of a wet fish. At least the Mac OS back then (and even now!) had a bit of life to it.
Sure about that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ap...sh_Desktop.png
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:55
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,236
Ha-ha! A 30MB HDD. Unless they just used memory back then. That OS looks absolutely basic. No life to it whatsoever.
30MB was a lot. I think XT I used as my first PC had 20MB and you could fit _everything_ on it
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 15:57
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,236
In the age of ASCII art that was magic.
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 16:01
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 51,198
Well at least it had decent graphics, which for 1984/85 was very impressive I watch a Youtube video series called OSFirstTimer. It's done by an Australian who gets his mother (who uses Windows XP) to try out all sorts of different OSes, new and old. He got her to try out Windows 1.0 and she said it looked like it was still booting up Check it out. It's at youtube.com/user/osfirsttimer.
cnbcwatcher is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 16:07
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 66,775
Well at least it had decent graphics, which for 1984/85 was very impressive I watch a Youtube video series called OSFirstTimer. It's done by an Australian who gets his mother (who uses Windows XP) to try out all sorts of different OSes, new and old. He got her to try out Windows 1.0 and she said it looked like it was still booting up Check it out. It's at youtube.com/user/osfirsttimer.
I suppose.
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 16:12
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 51,198
Well if I had been around in the 80s I would probably have used the Macintosh or some other OS rather than Windows 1.0. Not much has changed now. I prefer my Macs to anything running Windows 8 Of course running Windows on a Mac doesn't count and it's handy to have a Windows partition/VM
cnbcwatcher is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 16:37
Ulysses777
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 371
One word.

Workbench.
Ulysses777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 16:58
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 66,775
Well if I had been around in the 80s I would probably have used the Macintosh or some other OS rather than Windows 1.0. Not much has changed now. I prefer my Macs to anything running Windows 8 Of course running Windows on a Mac doesn't count and it's handy to have a Windows partition/VM
Of course it does. It's still Windows.
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 17:12
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 51,198
Of course it does. It's still Windows.
Yes but it runs on Apple hardware. Of course if you use Parallels or VMWare Fusion to run it Windows is essentially just another Mac program What I don't get is people who spend over 1000 on a Mac and wipe it and install Windows on it because they're too lazy to learn the Mac system. Why spend all that money on a Mac just to run Windows on it? Dual boot I can understand because it's useful to have it for games or other Windows-only software someone might need for work, but I don't understand having only Windows installed on a shiny Mac. It's a form of blasphemy IMO.
cnbcwatcher is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 17:23
Stig
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sandy Heath, Beds, UK
Posts: 7,013
Wow, 19 posts before the mention of the Mac in a Windows thread. It must be a record.
Stig is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 17:33
PsychoTherapist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 1,963
Windows 1 was pretty dire and Windows 2 was not much better.

Imo, Digital Research's GEM was much superior on the PC, even after it was forced to strip down it's GUI due to being sued by Apple.

It wasn't until Windows 3.0 where Microsoft finally started to get their act together.
PsychoTherapist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2013, 17:35
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 66,775
Yes but it runs on Apple hardware. Of course if you use Parallels or VMWare Fusion to run it Windows is essentially just another Mac program What I don't get is people who spend over 1000 on a Mac and wipe it and install Windows on it because they're too lazy to learn the Mac system. Why spend all that money on a Mac just to run Windows on it? Dual boot I can understand because it's useful to have it for games or other Windows-only software someone might need for work, but I don't understand having only Windows installed on a shiny Mac. It's a form of blasphemy IMO.
So it's not Windows you hate, it's just hardware that hasn't been made by Apple that you hate then?
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:37.