I also used to think this, till I came across disk images of Windows 3.11 and Windows for Workgroups 3.1 on Usenet.What versions are currently tested? (Both 3.1, 3.11 and Workgroups, non-Workgroups?)
3.11 and "Windows for Workgroups" is the same thing AFAIK. Both 3.1 and 3.11 are known to work.
I still had the ones for Windows for Workgroups 3.1 on my comp, so I'd thought I'd try them out. Here are some screenshots I created a couple of minutes ago using VMware:
http://middelvinger.student.utwente.nl/screenshots/
I also came across this page from MS:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q114301/
I think the reason many people don't like it, is because it seemed less compatible (while that may not be true, since the problems weren't with WinOS/2 but with Dosemu).Are you sure there aren't any extra advantages with this?
I don't know. People seem to not like WinOS2, but as for me there are no advantages in avoiding it at all. It may even be a little faster as it doesn't need the virtualization of LDT.
Other reasons might be that you would need to get os2win31.zip and mess with some stuff before it works.
There might also be people that would like to use Windows 3.1 in a situation, where licenses and stuff is important. (And you need an OS/2 license according to the Dosemu documentation for WinOS/2.)
Hmm, yes this indeed isn't really necessairy. I'm using PC DOS 2k instead of FreeDOS btw.I cannot run MS-DOS programs from within WinOS/2 for example. I always thought this was a WinOS/2 limitation.
It appears not. This is the limitation of both FreeDOS and dosemu. FreeDOS can be improved, but dosemu will have to provide the whole lot of VxD code to allow the concurrent DOS sessions. Such a code is not in Wine, neither it is documented. So unless someone is to invest some *real* work into it (like Win4Lin guys did), I'd say there are no hopes. But hey, that's silly:) You can just start multiple xdosemu sessions and get much more reliable environment that the one of Win3.1.
Win32s support would be really nice btw, because many newer applications seem to depend on it.Also I tried to install a game in MS Windows at some point (Phantasmagoria) and it didn't work. I also couldn't play the videos that came with it.
There are many things to improve in windows support. You may start filling up the bug reports on it, but right now there are still many known problems to work out, so the bugs will have to wait (on BTS).
Hopefully I'll have a clean Windows install soon in Dosemu and I'll be able to do some testing.
Video for Windows currently seems to hang for me with Dosemu 1.3.1. That might be because I removed some stuff from some ini at some point because I got errors about it though. I've also installed other junk in my Windows install, which is why it is kind of messy.move towards win95 support, but nothing more.
That would be really great of course :) Dosemu would be pretty similar to Win4Lin then I think.
Win4Lin did a great work. Dosemu is unlikely to catch up. But running win95 with the very limited capabilities would also be nice. Btw, it may be possible already I think. AFAIK some very early Chicago betas were able to boot in 3.1 mode (by executing win31.exe IIRC). Later the kernel was reworked and the 3.1 mode was abandonned. I think this may even run under dosemu. But getting such a Windows looks problematic these days.
Hmm, was it also possible with WinOS/2 to play videos?
Depends on dosemu version I think. Since 1.2.2 it might be possible.
That Chicago stuff sounds very interesting. I've seen it several times on Usenet, so I'll watch out for it :)
What I also always found weird was that the setup of Windows 98 uses the Windows 3.1 style (only with different colors). I'm wondering how much of Windows 3.1 is actually still in there.
Julius - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
