well i did it,thanks for all the help
Printable View
well i did it,thanks for all the help
this is what i used i guess and all you need as long as i dont get a virus
http://lightspeedref.web1000.com/main.html#Browsers
ie3.03 sp1
Good to see you're on the net with Windows 3.1, and that your system problems seem to be resolved.
For a REAL challenge, try it without even the benefit of Windows--
the Arachne Web Browser is pretty cool. (Hardcore DOS fans only!)
ok thanks
i have a few questions and comments .
can i mute the modem?
when i pull out modem cord the screen goes black.
whats a good firewall for win 3.1?
i wonder why it keeps saving my password?- i guess ill just erase it before i turn it off
i wonder if microsoft was stupid to dump it and upgrade?it seems to be a better os than the others .
except for a few reasons.
i havent tried xp much but i guess its good too....
will it detect a sound card or pcmcia laptop thing for sound ?
its seems like a lot of old computers i bought 3 years ago never had browsers on them just games
You may need to modify the initialization string for the modem... Addingto the string may do it (before the ^M, if present.Code:M0
Windows 3.1 really doesn't have that many remote exploits for it as far as I know... someone might try to ICMP flood you, but if they fingerprint the system as 3.1 they'll probably just ignore it as far as "hacking" it.
There are probably PCMCIA sound card drivers available for Windows 3.1-- the card manufacturer's website is the best place to look...
Windows 3.1 is pretty quick on 486/586 hardware, given 16 or 32MB of RAM.... but 64MB is pretty much the limit due to those versions of HIMEM.SYS. Windows 3.1 is just a shell stuck over DOS (in some ways, so is Win95, Win98, and WinME, really), but even with Win32s it just doesn't do 32-bit programs very well, and any non-Windows program thrown in really makes you take a performance hit. If you have the right hardware, Windows XP will really shine. It can take advantage of the instruction sets available in the Pentium series (and is supposedly 'optimized' for the Pentium 4), while at the time of Windows 3.x's release, the 386 series of CPU's was the big thing out there, very little was done to optimize Windows for the 486 since few people had them.
I'm really not sure if Windows 3.1 has ANY optimizations for the 486. What this means in a nutshell is that Windows 3.1 will treat a Pentium 2 the way it would treat a 386-- it's not aware that there are newer, faster instructions out there, or that there is a such thing as MMX, etc....
Probably a bit too technical despite my attempt to oversimplify.
few bought 486s?
When Windows 3.1 first came out, few could afford the 486.
You should probably use google and search for "CPU history" or "history of Windows" or something.
Back in '91, you shelled out $1500 and got a 386SX-16 with 2MB of RAM and called it an awesome deal. You'd have to spend another $400 if you wanted a 386DX, or if you wanted to go whole hog and get the 486 you'd have to spend about $2500 in total. The 486 chips were more expensive, and the 486 (like the 386DX)* had a 32-bit external data path, so the boards to support them were more expensive. It's not like now where it seems you spend less and less and get more and more.
Taken in context, my assertion that "few people had them" was correct, as I was referring to a very specific time period.
*People may laugh at the 386 now, but it still represents the greatest leap in x86 computing ever due to its ability to jump in and out of protected mode without resetting, unlike the brain-dead 80286. Also, the first 386 models had a 32bit internal and external data path, and a 32-bit address bus, allowing access to 4GB of RAM and 64TB of virtual memory. The 386SX, released later, somewhat resembled the 286 with its 24-bit address bus and a 16-bit external data path, therefore addressing only 16MB of RAM and 1GB of virtual memory. However, unlike the 286, it was still fully 32-bits internally, and could use all three modes (Real, Protected, and Virtual 8086) of the 386. (It wasn't until after the SX model was released that the original 386 was later renamed 386DX to differentiate it from the 386SX. The suffices stand for Double-word eXternal and Single-word eXternal, referring to their external data bus, and not to the presence or lack of an FPU. One had to purchase a 387DX or 387SX if one wished to add an FPU.)
Another interesting note regarding FPU's: The 486SX was merely a 486DX with the FPU disabled. The 487SX was a 486DX with a different pinout-- when you installed the 487SX it disabled the existing 486SX and took over all CPU/FPU functions, allowing you to remove the 486SX entirely. Many people didn't know that. If you were on to the secret, you ordered a motherboard without a CPU and ordered the 487SX, because often the 487SX was cheaper than the 486DX (Intel had to price it that way so people would actually go the "Buy the SX now and add an FPU later" route.) (There were a few variants of the 487, however, so you had to know what you were doing.)
i liked my 386 s .. i wish i had kept them .. i guess i was stupid