Question Windows 95 on Android

[luki1997a]

Hello:hello:
Is anybody still using windows 95:lol:? I've just installed it on my Android(and yes, I get bluescreen one time xD) and I want to change its resolution to 480x320. Does anybody know the way how to do this? Of course if googled it but I get only MS pages with support(mostly for Vista).

If you help me then I will try to run ORBITER after 5 years on my android 5.0 with 8-core processor @4 GHz running Windows 9 on VM:lol::lol::lol:

 

[garyw]

To get the correct screen size you need the right drivers and they probably don't exist.

I assume that this is win95 running in an emulated mode rather than as a replacement to the andriod OS?

 

[luki1997a]

Andriod is an OS not a platform so you can't install windows 95 onto an android

Yes I know. I've installed W 95 on a Virtual Machine(DOSBox), and I think it's not running intel processor:tiphat:

 

[Turbinator]

I miss Windows 95, there is just something magical about it.

It is so simple, clean and to the point. It reminds me of the awesomeness of the 90s.

 

[Linguofreak]

I miss Windows 95, there is just something magical about it.

It is so simple, clean and to the point. It reminds me of the awesomeness of the 90s.

Well, I miss having Windows Classic as the default interface, rather than Luna or Aero, but that's about all.

Decent memory protection a la NT and Linux FTW.

 

[n0mad23]

I'm pretty sure you need RUNDLL to interface the video size on Win 95.

 

[jedidia]

I've installed W 95 on a Virtual Machine(DOSBox)

This must be the most hilarious thing I heard this weak... :lol: Only the idea makes me shiver.
I don't think it's possible to get the needed drivers together, though.

It is so simple, clean and to the point. It reminds me of the awesomeness of the 90s.

no, just... no.
Win95 started to choke on its own bit-rot after a very short time. You had to re-intstall it at least once a year if you where frequently installing and uninstalling programs, and it still used the the underlying outdated ram structure from MS-Dos, which wouldn't be replaced until Win2k. Win95 did make memory management a bit easier since it could dump executables in other places than the first 640 KB of ram, but since it still used the same architecture that was slow as hell.

It was better than Win98, though, which suffered the exact same problems and then some from new features. The really stable windows area started with Win2k, which was NT-based, which was the "professional" version of windows before 2k. I.e. if your computer was doing something important, like commanding industrial machinery or somesuch, you ran NT, because you just could not rely on 95 to not crash completely randomly.

Well, I miss having Windows Classic as the default interface, rather than Luna or Aero, but that's about all.

Errr... Win7 still offers the classic interface, and for a change you can even set it where you'd expect the setting to be...

 

[Linguofreak]

no, just... no.
Win95 started to choke on its own bit-rot after a very short time. You had to re-intstall it at least once a year if you where frequently installing and uninstalling programs, and it still used the the underlying outdated ram structure from MS-Dos, which wouldn't be replaced until Win2k. Win95 did make memory management a bit easier since it could dump executables in other places than the first 640 KB of ram, but since it still used the same architecture that was slow as hell.

It was better than Win98, though, which suffered the exact same problems and then some from new features. The really stable windows area started with Win2k, which was NT-based, which was the "professional" version of windows before 2k.

2k was a professional edition (though we used it for a while on one of our home desktops). The home edition of Win2k was the deplorable WinME (which was what came pre installed on the aformentioned machine and remained on it for four or five years, and was also DOS based, though it removed a lot of DOS functionality).

NT Based home editions started with XP.

 

[n122vu]

2k was a professional edition (though we used it for a while on one of our home desktops). The home edition of Win2k was the deplorable WinME (which was what came pre installed on the aformentioned machine and remained on it for four or five years, and was also DOS based, though it removed a lot of DOS functionality).

NT Based home editions started with XP.

WinME was literally Windows 98 with a new GUI, but somehow less stable. It was only related to Windows 2000 by the timeframe in which it was released.

What amazes me is, NT was much more suited for reliable operation in manufacturing environments, Win2k equally so. And yet the majority of furniture manufacturing software from that era is designed to run only on Windows 95 or 98. We have two older CNC machines that we have to run the controller PC inside Virtual PC, one is Win95 on an XP host, the other is Win98 on a Win7 host. Frustrating to say the least, but at least if the PC goes down I can have it back up in minutes since I have a backup of the virtual HD file.

 

[Xyon]

Heh, this reminds me of a conversation I had a few days back over virtualising OSes.

I've got Windows 1 - 7 popped into VMs (why 7 I forget because the host is 7 too...) Including their "server" editions. It's quite fun to go back in time like that and remember what Windows was like back when it was a program you called yourself from your DOS shell and played with for a bit (or it crashed in one of ten million unique ways and you rebooted) - even Windows 98 would half the time deconfigure itself from boot scripts (OK, so that was me not knowing what I was doing but shh). Oh, and remember that Windows 1 didn't have overlapping windows... That just feels strange.

95 was fun, but had too many unresolved, unfixable issues, same as 98, but moreso. And woe betide you if you tried gaming on it, for it made every problem worse.

 

[jedidia]

NT Based home editions started with XP.

seriously? I kind of remember a "based on new technologiy" from my 2k professional startup screen... also, there was a Win2k pro edition and a home eddition, AND ME. As far as I know 2k and Me are completely unrelated.

And yet the majority of furniture manufacturing software from that era is designed to run only on Windows 95 or 98.

Oh the hurt. The machine industry luckily went exclusively with NT or UNIX.

 

[Linguofreak]

seriously? I kind of remember a "based on new technologiy" from my 2k professional startup screen... also, there was a Win2k pro edition and a home eddition, AND ME. As far as I know 2k and Me are completely unrelated.

I've never heard of a 2k home edition. I've *used* 2k in a home environment, but I don't know of any home edition of 2k apart from ME, and the [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2000"]Wikipedia article[/ame] on 2k only mentions the Professional edition and three different server editions.

Me and 2k were as unrelated as 95 and NT 3.5 or 4 in terms of architecture, but in terms of their purpose in Microsoft's product line, they had the same relationship as XP Home and XP Professional.