3 ms·
> My brain is rusty It is. Because: > but I feel like MSDOS 5.11 was where things finally just worked There was no MS-DOS 5.11. It went 4, 4.01, 5, 6, 6.2,
by lproven 3y ago
> My brain is rusty
It is. Because:
> but I feel like MSDOS 5.11 was where things finally just worked
There was no MS-DOS 5.11.
It went 4, 4.01, 5, 6, 6.2, 6.21, 6.22.
IBM had a few extra versions as the divorce was occurring at the time.
- cesarb 3y ago> There was no MS-DOS 5.11. There was Windows 3.11 which ran on top of MS-DOS 5.0, the two numbers probably got mixed in their memory.
- Narishma 3y agoThere was also an MS-DOS 2.11.
- lproven 3y agoThere was indeed a Windows 3.11 and the much more common Windows for Workgroups 3.11 which was a profoundly different product (32-bit disk subsystem & 32-bit networking subsystem -- the first time these pillars of Win9x went out into the world.) But neither of them ran on any particular version of DOS. They ran on PC DOS, MS-DOS and DR-DOS -- although Microsoft tried very hard to block the latter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code They ran on DOS 3.3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. There's nothing at all that links them especially to MS-DOS 5.