4 ms·

> Miraculously, most games just worked despite running under a different DPMI server from what they were originally developed with. There were occasional issues

> Miraculously, most games just worked despite running under a different DPMI server from what they were originally developed with. There were occasional issues with specific games. Popular ones include games which assumed that all memory was physical and games which assumed the interrupt flag was unvirtualized, but for the most part, things worked well enough that the remaining issues could be treated as app-specific bugs. It's funny because at that moment in time I was running DOS games, and most of them worked without issues and I was thinking that Win95, wasn't too different and just a UI, like it was Win 3.1x

bluedino 3y ago
I felt like a wizard, running multiple windowed DOS VGA games, along with Word and a video (Weezer!) playing all at the same time on Windows 95 Something about the multitasking in Win95 (among other things) was so different in Windows 3.1, even on the same hardware. You could clearly see processes passing control to each other and updates were so slow.
- irq 3y ago
  > and a video (Weezer!) Was it the Happy Days music video that came on the Win95 CD? :)
- marcodiego 3y ago
  For those who don't know: win95 came with an 'extras' cd-rom with a few videos. Among them there a Weezer clip [1] and "Good Times"[2] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kemivUKb4f4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kemivUKb4f4 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqL1BLzn3qc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqL1BLzn3qc
  - dxdm 3y ago
    Good times. I remember finding these videos after installing Win95 on my very first self-built PC. Thanks for the nostalgia hit.
  - pdntspa 3y ago
    And Hover!
- TazeTSchnitzel 3y ago
  > Something about the multitasking in Win95 (among other things) was so different in Windows 3.1, even on the same hardware. You could clearly see processes passing control to each other and updates were so slow. That's exactly what was different: Windows 3.1 used only co-operative multitasking (for 16-bit Windows apps anyway), where apps have to yield control to eachother, whereas Windows 95 added pre-emptive multitasking where apps will give up control when the OS wants them to, whether they like it or not.

bluedino 3y ago

I felt like a wizard, running multiple windowed DOS VGA games, along with Word and a video (Weezer!) playing all at the same time on Windows 95 Something about the multitasking in Win95 (among other things) was so different in Windows 3.1, even on the same hardware. You could clearly see processes passing control to each other and updates were so slow.

irq 3y ago
> and a video (Weezer!) Was it the Happy Days music video that came on the Win95 CD? :)
marcodiego 3y ago
For those who don't know: win95 came with an 'extras' cd-rom with a few videos. Among them there a Weezer clip [1] and "Good Times"[2] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kemivUKb4f4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kemivUKb4f4 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqL1BLzn3qc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqL1BLzn3qc
- dxdm 3y ago
  Good times. I remember finding these videos after installing Win95 on my very first self-built PC. Thanks for the nostalgia hit.
- pdntspa 3y ago
  And Hover!
TazeTSchnitzel 3y ago
> Something about the multitasking in Win95 (among other things) was so different in Windows 3.1, even on the same hardware. You could clearly see processes passing control to each other and updates were so slow. That's exactly what was different: Windows 3.1 used only co-operative multitasking (for 16-bit Windows apps anyway), where apps have to yield control to eachother, whereas Windows 95 added pre-emptive multitasking where apps will give up control when the OS wants them to, whether they like it or not.