4 ms·

I was half expecting something about how to get tcp into windows, but this is win95 where they shipped it inside the os and put some company out of business tha

by sroussey 11mo ago

I was half expecting something about how to get tcp into windows, but this is win95 where they shipped it inside the os and put some company out of business that used to sell that.

jahnu 11mo ago
I used to use Trumpet Winsock with Windows 3.1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trumpet_Winsock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trumpet_Winsock
hypercube33 11mo ago
Didn't Win95 get tcp from FreeBSD?
- LeoPanthera 11mo ago
  That was Windows 2000.
  - hypercube33 11mo ago
    No I'm fairly certain that berkley sockets were used as a foundation to integrate a full network stack under winsockets so people wouldn't have to go buy things like Trumpet (Windows 3.1) and you could coax out messages saying as much from the commandline but Google is failing me (I'm sure most of this stuff is on usenet which no one seems to care about these days)
    - zweifuss 11mo ago
      The history of the Windows TCP/IP stack went most likely like this: IBM (NetBEUI, no TCP/IP) -> Spider TCP/IP Stack + SysV STREAMS environment -> MS rewrite 1 (early NT, Winsock instead of STREAMS) -> MS rewrite 2 (make win2000 faster): https://web.archive.org/web/20151229084950/http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/6/19/05641/7357 https://web.archive.org/web/20151229084950/http://www.kuro5h...
      - kalleboo 11mo ago
        It's interesting how STREAMS pervaded everything for a short while (Apple's Open Transport networking stack for System 7.5 and up was also based on STREAMS) but everyone almost immediately wanted to get rid of it and just use Berkley sockets interfaces.
        xbar 11mo ago
        Berkeley, for disambiguation.
        kalleboo 11mo ago
        Oops, too late to edit my comment!
        justsomehnguy 11mo ago
        I still don't quite get how you should had communicate with the other systems over the network with STREAMS. With IP you have an address and the means to route the data to that address and back, with TCP/UDP sockets you have the address:port endpoint so the recipient doesn't need to pass a received packet to the all processes on the system, asking "is that yours". So if there is already some network stack providing both the addressing and the messaging...
        fredoralive 11mo ago
        STREAMS isn’t a networking protocol, it’s an internal data routing thing some UNIXes use locally, and amongst other things to implement the network stack in it. You’d still be talking of stuff like IP addresses and the like with it. Probably with the XTI API instead of BSD sockets, which is a bit more complex but you need the flexibility to handle different network stacks than just TCP/IP, like erm…
        justsomehnguy 11mo ago
        https://web.archive.org/web/20060716013234/http://www2.linuxjournal.com/article/3086 https://web.archive.org/web/20060716013234/http://www2.linux... Sadly no images.
  - EvanAnderson 11mo ago
    The story with the Windows NT IP stack is nuanced, but it wasn't just lifted from BSD: https://web.archive.org/web/20051114154320/http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory%3Bsid%3D2001%2F6%2F19%2F05641%2F7357 https://web.archive.org/web/20051114154320/http://www.kuro5h...
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- pak9rabid 11mo ago
  Win95 had its own stack, codenamed Wolverine
ogurechny 11mo ago
The turbulent times and the breakneck speed of computer development need to be taken into account. Not long before that computer networks were strictly corporate things installed by contractors choosing hardware, driver and software suppliers suitable for tasks performed by employees or students, and someone who installed it at home was the same kind of nerd who would drag an engine from the work into his room to tinker. Non-business-oriented software rarely cared about third party network functions. Then network card became a consumer device, and a bit later it became integrated and expected. Also, Windows did not install TCP/IP components on computers without a network card (most of them until the Millennium era), it was an optional component. You could not “ping” anything, as there was no ping utility, nor libraries it could call. In that aspect, those network-less Windows systems were not much different from network-less DOS systems. The installer probably still works that way (or can be made to, by excluding some dependencies), but it's hard to find hardware without any network connectivity today. I wonder what Windows 11 installer does when there is no network card to phone home...
- franga2000 11mo ago
  > I wonder what Windows 11 installer does when there is no network card to phone home... One of "works fine", "needs a command line trick to continue" or "refuses to work completely" depending on which specific edition of win11 your computer has been afflicted with.

I was half expecting something about how to get tcp into windows, but this is win95 where they shipped it inside the os and put some company out of business that used to sell that.

jahnu 11mo ago

I used to use Trumpet Winsock with Windows 3.1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trumpet_Winsock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trumpet_Winsock

hypercube33 11mo ago

Didn't Win95 get tcp from FreeBSD?

LeoPanthera 11mo ago
That was Windows 2000.
- hypercube33 11mo ago
  No I'm fairly certain that berkley sockets were used as a foundation to integrate a full network stack under winsockets so people wouldn't have to go buy things like Trumpet (Windows 3.1) and you could coax out messages saying as much from the commandline but Google is failing me (I'm sure most of this stuff is on usenet which no one seems to care about these days)
  - zweifuss 11mo ago
    The history of the Windows TCP/IP stack went most likely like this: IBM (NetBEUI, no TCP/IP) -> Spider TCP/IP Stack + SysV STREAMS environment -> MS rewrite 1 (early NT, Winsock instead of STREAMS) -> MS rewrite 2 (make win2000 faster): https://web.archive.org/web/20151229084950/http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/6/19/05641/7357 https://web.archive.org/web/20151229084950/http://www.kuro5h...
    - kalleboo 11mo ago
      It's interesting how STREAMS pervaded everything for a short while (Apple's Open Transport networking stack for System 7.5 and up was also based on STREAMS) but everyone almost immediately wanted to get rid of it and just use Berkley sockets interfaces.
      - xbar 11mo ago
        Berkeley, for disambiguation.
        kalleboo 11mo ago
        Oops, too late to edit my comment!
      - justsomehnguy 11mo ago
        I still don't quite get how you should had communicate with the other systems over the network with STREAMS. With IP you have an address and the means to route the data to that address and back, with TCP/UDP sockets you have the address:port endpoint so the recipient doesn't need to pass a received packet to the all processes on the system, asking "is that yours". So if there is already some network stack providing both the addressing and the messaging...
        fredoralive 11mo ago
        STREAMS isn’t a networking protocol, it’s an internal data routing thing some UNIXes use locally, and amongst other things to implement the network stack in it. You’d still be talking of stuff like IP addresses and the like with it. Probably with the XTI API instead of BSD sockets, which is a bit more complex but you need the flexibility to handle different network stacks than just TCP/IP, like erm…
        justsomehnguy 11mo ago
        https://web.archive.org/web/20060716013234/http://www2.linuxjournal.com/article/3086 https://web.archive.org/web/20060716013234/http://www2.linux... Sadly no images.
- EvanAnderson 11mo ago
  The story with the Windows NT IP stack is nuanced, but it wasn't just lifted from BSD: https://web.archive.org/web/20051114154320/http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory%3Bsid%3D2001%2F6%2F19%2F05641%2F7357 https://web.archive.org/web/20051114154320/http://www.kuro5h...
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
pak9rabid 11mo ago
Win95 had its own stack, codenamed Wolverine

ogurechny 11mo ago

The turbulent times and the breakneck speed of computer development need to be taken into account. Not long before that computer networks were strictly corporate things installed by contractors choosing hardware, driver and software suppliers suitable for tasks performed by employees or students, and someone who installed it at home was the same kind of nerd who would drag an engine from the work into his room to tinker. Non-business-oriented software rarely cared about third party network functions. Then network card became a consumer device, and a bit later it became integrated and expected. Also, Windows did not install TCP/IP components on computers without a network card (most of them until the Millennium era), it was an optional component. You could not “ping” anything, as there was no ping utility, nor libraries it could call. In that aspect, those network-less Windows systems were not much different from network-less DOS systems. The installer probably still works that way (or can be made to, by excluding some dependencies), but it's hard to find hardware without any network connectivity today. I wonder what Windows 11 installer does when there is no network card to phone home...

franga2000 11mo ago
> I wonder what Windows 11 installer does when there is no network card to phone home... One of "works fine", "needs a command line trick to continue" or "refuses to work completely" depending on which specific edition of win11 your computer has been afflicted with.