Welp, new time here...

What did he mean by this?

>>55384892
I don't know lol
I'm new here
>>roblox is awesome

>>55384880
Do you have a windows 95 iso?

>>55384880
I prefer 98SE.

>>55384952
Winworldpc has some.
The mirrors are slow as fuck tho.

File: 1442446067880.jpg (32KB, 448x545px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 448x545px

>>55384982
What about the serial keys???

File: DESK.png (65KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 640x480px

>>55384880
already have it

>>55384982
all the mirrors were down last time I checked (few months ago), so they probably scaled back or whatever
used to be pretty quick, if not amazing

>>55385008
they're also there
and if they weren't, less than one minute of googling would bring up a working 95 serial

>>55384982
cool thanks will post from win 98 asap

>>55385033
Not Win2k last time I checked. Anyone remember Seriall with that horrible green background? It was good for a while then the warez groups took over

>>55385107
https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-nt-2000

File: 3dfx.jpg (387KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1280x1024px

Windows 98 is best 9x

>tfw Voodoo 5500 pci

>>55385011
>Nichijou
excellent taste senpai

File: error.png (6KB, 641x408px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 641x408px

help

File: yay.png (12KB, 643x401px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 643x401px

>>55385748

File: 95desktop.jpg (165KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1024x768px

>>55384880
I already have it senpai~

Why does Win98 have such a comfy aesthetic to it?

>>55385877
consistency

>System requirements for windows 98
>RAM: 16Mb
>Hard Drive space: 120Mb
>CPU: 60Mhz

Sometimes we forget how bloated everything has become.

>>55385958
You can even install it on a 386 with tricks

>>55385958
This made me sniffle.

>>55386145
60Mhz is slow as fuck.
not 600Mhz, which would be half of 1,2GHz
even calculators of today are probably faster than that.

>>55385958
Sometimes we forget how fucking slow things ran back then

>>55386208
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Texas_Instruments_graphing_calculators

wrong

>>55386228
There are 2 on the list that are faster

>>55386252
faster than 60mhz but not 600

>>55386208
A Pentium II at the time was clocked at 333 MHz and was considered high-end for a Windows desktop.

>>55386208
Doom runs fine on my old TI-89 @ 10MHz.

>>55385859
>utorrent

enjoi ur botnet, cuck

>>55386208
there were a lot of 60/66 MHz systems that were only three years old at the time of 98's release

File: 600es.png (51KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1024x768px

>>55384880
Do I really have to?

Why are we all using 98?
I wanna get my P III machine working again now.

>>55386800
I'm guessing you're all GNU/Linux users and you wanted to raise the odds of getting a blue screen because you like a challenge.

>>55386764

Did I go completely overkill with 320mb RAM on my 600e? It's a 366mhz P-II

Do you know anything about the external floppy drive attachment I have one and can't seem to get it to work.

I've also got the Microsoft Best of Windows Entertainment Pack complete with Pipedream and Chips Crusade and Taipei pretty legit famalam

>>55387028
I just run 128 MB in mine because of autism, it's both an even power of two and a pretty typical size for a high-end laptop around 1999, but it hasn't really stifled me with anything, feels like you get fucked by CPU and RAM speed moreso than anything with most jobs. Haven't had much difficulty shitposting and SSHing into my server while making some diagrams in Visio or fucking around on Excel.

The external floppy drive should be pretty turnkey, did you try sticking the drive itself into the ultrabay to see if it actually worked? I just have to plug mine into the port and go pretty much.

>>55387117

Wait you can do that? I have a separate drivebay floppy and the DVD I didn't know the one that plugs into the side was swappable

File: win.jpg (31KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 640x480px

>Not installing warship edition

>>55387396
That doesn't sound like a 600E, those only have a single disk bay and the external floppy disk is just an UltraBay drive in an enclosure keyed only for floppy drives.

Sure you don't have a 770Z or A-series?

>>55387426
Well I guess I forgot the A series weren't shipping until the PII was old news, they did release a 3-series with a 366 MHz Celeron though

How can I get the 95 aesthetic on 2010+ windows besides blasting Macintosh+ on my olden Earthquake Multimedia Products 2.0 speakers all day?

>>55384880
Fine, i just won't install it :^)

>>55387785
>using the smiley with a carat nose

File: golden.png (522KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 1024x768px

>tfw comfy athlon64 3200+ win98 pc

>>55388343
>that horrifying 16-bit kludge on a 64-bit chip
stop trampling my autism before I call the police

>>55385859

Is that the starting rooftop in Duke Nukem 3D?

whats the aesthetic one with the green background? 95 or 98?

>>55384880
>tfw
>there is a website with windows 95 emulation

>>55390153
98 >>55385222

>>55388362
What does 16-bit color have to do with the CPU architecture?

>>55384880
Been postponing this for so long...

>>55386764
>NT4
>USB
Wait what

>>55384880
>>55384931
You don't need a username here. We're all anonymous.

>>55390153
95, 98
Also 2000 and ME if you haven't installed a display driver

>>55387409
>"rowboat with a shotgun" meme

>>55384880
>download

bu-but i have the install CD already

>>55384880
But it wont run very well at only 4 meg of RAM.

>>55391614
even w95 supports 2 usb ports

>>55391694
You mean Win95C which has really basic USB support, aka it lacks drivers for anything

File: image.jpg (43KB, 2048x272px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 2048x272px

People are strange

>>55385222

trips confirm

>>55385011
Beautiful

>>55384880
>win95 user
Nuke time!

>>55391614
A number of webcams shipped with generic USB hub drivers that thwarted Microshit's master plan pretty handily.

I don't even know why they bothered gimping it, there were a lot of reasons other than USB support to upgrade to 2000.

>>55391148
the OS, not the color depth

>>55385958
Those requirements were quite a lot for systems that were 4 years older

>>55385958
Windows 10 will install and run just fine on mid-range 2005-era hardware.

Windows 98 will install (with hacks) and crawl on ultra high-end 1988-era hardware.

Windows 10 x86's minimum requirements are about that of a 12-year-old system (2003) on release.

Windows 98's minimum requirements are about that of a 4-year-old system (1994) on release.

Windows 10/NT includes proper networking, security, and stability features.

Windows 98 was a 16-bit abomination with 32-bit extensions lazily grafted on that doesn't even have proper password lock support.

http://zamunda.net/banan?id=74706&hit=1&t=soft
Here you go

>>55384880
is windows 95 really better than 10?

File: shot0003.png (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>Still can't achieve a win98 rice with Xfce
fuck everything

>>55386208
you'd be surprised what you could do with 60MHz, kid

back when you could still delete system32 without any kind of warning or permissions or whatever stopping you

>>55395741
it's 85 better than 10

>>55395828
that's a lot

>>55395763
install fvwm

>>55395848
wait till you try 2003

>>55384880
>using proprietary botnet shit
just theme gnu/linux to look like win95

>>55395763
how? get classic95 and grab colors from screenshots online

>>55385877
nostalgia

>>55384931
>>55391628
>not disabling names clientside to preserve the purity of an anonymous imageboard

>>55395986
By that logic reddit is just as good if you disable names clientside

>>55384880
What if I've already downloaded it? Do I need to kill myself if I don't download it again?

>>55388343
Put XP on it.

>>55396005
Maybe if everyone did.

If more people disable names clientside, then tripfags will get less attention, and less people will use names over time.

>>55385008
>what is google?

>>55385748
ITT: People born after 9/11 try to install operating systems from the 1990s

File: DSCN1494.jpg (1MB, 1809x2653px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1809x2653px

just bought some zip disquettes
what should I store on them?

>>55386208
60Mhz is enough for basic data transfer. The only reason why we need multicore now is multimedia transcoding takes a buttload of performance power. Having everything from OS shells to web sites run with a shitload of fancy graphics and composing isn't helping either.

>>55396189
The sex scene from Fast Times at Rigemont High.

Her breasts were amazing.

>>55396157
I actually used windows 95 myself senpai. Never installed it though came with a prebuilt compaq pc

>>55386208
My graphing calculator is literally 6MHz.

>>55396367
My calculator's CPU runs at 884KHz

File: zipdisquettes.jpg (402KB, 1296x972px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1296x972px

>>55396157
My dad had a Compaq Presario with win3.1 that we gamed on. Before that we had a Commodore 64.

I still use win98 to play old DOS games better than dosbox and many games that don't work at all under modern Windows

>>55396189
clickofdeath.wav

>>55395946
>advanced botnet in an operating system where networking is literally an afterthought

>>55396885
Nope, got a couple new-ish IDE WD drive in there.
None of that OEM Maxtor crap. Good riddance.

I-Is Windows 2000 okay?

I know 2000 is still swiss cheese when it comes to security, but I like playing Half-Life on WON.

>>55397434
Also, I feel that running any 9x series on my laptop (Thinkpad T41) with a 1.4GHz processor is overkill.

>>55397366
Nah, I was suggesting what to store on the Zip disks, because that was an infamous problem with Zip drives back in the day. It was caused by some dickhead managers trying to save half a cent per drive by cutting a foam washer from the design. The washer was a pad to keep the heads from whacking hard into the back of the drive and coming unaligned. Apparently the designers heard about it after a while and told them to put it back in.

Today pretty much all the crap drives are dead, and only good Zip drives remain.

>>55395727
There's nearly no 16-bit code running on a 9x machine, other than to support whatever Windows 3 or DOS programs (or drivers, Win95 goes way out of its way to allow old 16-bit drivers to work because it's actually a properly 32-bit OS) the user wants to run.

95 is pretty well designed. It's still a bit crufty, but most commercial software, particularly of that era was (see: System 7 under the hood, makes Win95 look fucking elegant).

>>55397822
>95 is pretty well designed
Calling Win9x well designed is quite a stretch. It mapped the kernel into all processes' address spaces. Writable. At address zero. Writing to a null pointer is a common bug. Normally it's a protection fault and kills the program, but on Win9x it corrupts random kernel data structures and destabilizes the system.

>>55397822
>There's nearly no 16-bit code running on a 9x machine
9x is built on 16-bit code, it runs on top of DOS 7.x for fucks sake. The 32-bit extensions were definitely above and beyond the average shell, but the operating system and its software base were still very much rooted in 16-bit software. Remember how incompatible NT was with everything, or how awful the Pentium Pro was in the consumer space with its lackluster 16-bit performance?

>>55397998
a load of programs called code from their own 16-bit libraries (or fuck, called old Win16 versions of various APIs, like using mmsystem.dll for sound) or invoked actual DOS commands, and 16-bit installers were common until XP, even if the program was all 32-bit

NT's issues mainly came from its poor 16-bit support (and occasional Win32 implementation differences), in an environment where 16-bit support was expected by common programs of the day..

>>55397998
>it runs on top of DOS 7.x for fucks sake
It uses DOS 7 as a bootloader. Once Windows is loaded, it kicks DOS out of memory entirely. That's why there's no "exit to DOS" function like there was in 3.1.

Apart from DOS-style device drivers that it leaves in memory, it's as much "running on top of DOS" as Linux is when you load it with LOADLIN.EXE.

>The 32-bit extensions were definitely above and beyond the average shell, but the operating system and its software base were still very much rooted in 16-bit software.
This is true. Win9x had a 32 bit kernel and some 32 bit processes, but a lot of the userland stuff still thunked through to 16 bit code.

>Remember how incompatible NT was with everything, or how awful the Pentium Pro was in the consumer space with its lackluster 16-bit performance?
NT's incompatibility was for a few reasons, but wasn't because programs expected to have 16 bit code run. NT could run 16 bit code just fine.
- NT doesn't allow low level hardware access like Win9x does. You can't just read or write directly to a port. You have to go through a kernel mode driver.
- It's a different implementation of win32, with different bugs and quirks.
- Some paths and registry entries were different.
- EXEs and DLLs loaded at different default addresses than in Win9x, sometimes causing modules to need relocation, which is impossible if they were linked with fixups stripped.

>>55398231
>It uses DOS 7 as a bootloader. Once Windows is loaded, it kicks DOS out of memory entirely.
Interesting, had to wiki-surf through that a little more, it makes sense now.

NT probably was a bit of a poor example, most of the shit you run into problems with are games anyway.