Gallery: Windows 95 - 15 years after
by Andy Smith | August 24, 2010 9:06am PDT | Image 1 of 41
Previous | Next
On the biggest day of his professional career, August 24, 1995, Bill Gates takes center stage to introduce the world to Windows 95. Remember, this launch was so big it helped make Gates the richest man in the world. Here's a look back at some of the features and headaches that made this product so memorable. Mary Jo Foley blogs her thoughts on Win 95's 15th anniversary and more Windows to come.
Photo and screenshot credits: Microsoft
Just In
@AndyPagin
MS gets the blame - but the vast majority of problems were caused by 3rd party drivers and the applications that did not play well together.
You can easily test: isntall a fresh copy of Windows. Install ONLY the application that crashed - and then see if it crashes. If it does not then neither Windows nor the application is at fault - but some OTHER application that was installed onto the system that caused the problem and MS got all the blame. Reason why MS came up with their testing lab and that companies must pay MS to run their app through MS labs to get its seal of approval.
JUST LIKE APPLE does now.
Course Apple does not have to support millions of applications and billions of possible hardware combinations that those applications run on. They choose the hardware and you get little to no customizations to meet your specific hardware needs at all.
BTW, how many languages does the Apple OS come in? I've never seen that listed anywhere in how many different languages the whole OS menu system can be set to run under.
MS gets the blame - but the vast majority of problems were caused by 3rd party drivers and the applications that did not play well together.
You can easily test: isntall a fresh copy of Windows. Install ONLY the application that crashed - and then see if it crashes. If it does not then neither Windows nor the application is at fault - but some OTHER application that was installed onto the system that caused the problem and MS got all the blame. Reason why MS came up with their testing lab and that companies must pay MS to run their app through MS labs to get its seal of approval.
JUST LIKE APPLE does now.
Course Apple does not have to support millions of applications and billions of possible hardware combinations that those applications run on. They choose the hardware and you get little to no customizations to meet your specific hardware needs at all.
BTW, how many languages does the Apple OS come in? I've never seen that listed anywhere in how many different languages the whole OS menu system can be set to run under.
@TAPhilo
The idea that an entire operating system can be rendered permanently useless, with the only option being to re-install the whole lot because of something as trivial as a device driver fail is utterly unacceptable.
The idea that an entire operating system can be rendered permanently useless, with the only option being to re-install the whole lot because of something as trivial as a device driver fail is utterly unacceptable.
@TAPhilo Many of the BSOD's were also actually hardware glitches.
@TAPhilo - "The idea that an entire operating system can be rendered permanently useless, with the only option being to re-install the whole lot because of something as trivial as a device driver fail is utterly unacceptable. "
Think of the year Windows 95 came out. You had the choice of that, OS/2, Apple System 7, AmigaDOS, a very rudimentary version of Linux, and DOS 6.. And that's if you really didn't care to get any real work done.. Try to get software, and you're suddenly left with Windows, DOS, and System 7, all of which were non-protected-mode operating systems, all VERY susceptible to crashing because of a bad device driver.
Think of the year Windows 95 came out. You had the choice of that, OS/2, Apple System 7, AmigaDOS, a very rudimentary version of Linux, and DOS 6.. And that's if you really didn't care to get any real work done.. Try to get software, and you're suddenly left with Windows, DOS, and System 7, all of which were non-protected-mode operating systems, all VERY susceptible to crashing because of a bad device driver.
@AndyPagin
Tee hee giggle snort. If it's funny 300 times, it's sure to be funny 301 times!
Tee hee giggle snort. If it's funny 300 times, it's sure to be funny 301 times!
@Loverock Davidson
Quote:
"Here's a look back at some of the features and HEADACHES that made this product so memorable"
BSOD was a significant part of my Win95/98/2000 experience. In fact it was the single issue that made me switch to Linux.
Quote:
"Here's a look back at some of the features and HEADACHES that made this product so memorable"
BSOD was a significant part of my Win95/98/2000 experience. In fact it was the single issue that made me switch to Linux.
@AndyPagin why don't people make such comments, after using it so long.
@andy.smith@... I wasn't the one who asked, but oh my, thank you. There are actually times I wish for the good ol' "blue screen of death." Like when help desk calls and asks if I can help with a user that their computer is randomly and frequently rebooting. Help desk fortunately had already done a little homework and so they had turned off the default "restart on crash" feature. Instant BSOD of death instead. I had help desk read me the error message we now got on that BSOD. I don't know much about BSOD but it gave us the clue immediately to the problem (faulty CD-ROM driver).
I got a copy of Windows 95 at a convention that was being sponsored by Microsoft. Microsoft was also handing out free software disks that were all infected with viruses (I think it was a game disk - forgot which game. I didn't get one of those, lucky me!)
I purchased Win95. It was a piece of crap, but I needed it to stay current with Autocad. But what a piece of crap.
@chuckleberry -- Yeah, why exactly? Or am I just feeding a troll? Obviously Windows 95 wasn't a failure as a product.
@chuckleberry -
If you need to "stay current" with AutoCAD, why weren't you running it under NT?
If you need to "stay current" with AutoCAD, why weren't you running it under NT?
One or another version of 95 came with this really nice pine forest through a window wallpaper. I wish MS would make it available again.
Where is the blue screen of death capture during the demo? That was what really made the demo famous.
@TorinZece
I thought that was during a USB demo for Windows 98.
I thought that was during a USB demo for Windows 98.
I depended on what you ran on it but I often ran upwards of 32 applications simultaneously without issues. I remember lots of IT people in other companies complaining about crashes but I gave our 98 SOE a whole year of testing before I released it. It was very stable.
@gavin.bollard@...
Win 95 was not nearly as stable as Win 98 SE. Of course, the original Win 98 release was pretty crappy, too.
Win 95 was not nearly as stable as Win 98 SE. Of course, the original Win 98 release was pretty crappy, too.
@gavin.bollard@... Yes if your hardware was actually good systems had few issues. I remember running Win98 as a NAT box on a system I actually pulled from a companies trash can. It would run for months without crashing or needing rebooting!
What a trip down memory lane.
But has anybody else noticed, that the screen shot of Solitaire with the caption of "One of the greatest time wasters of history" . . .
Is actually on . . . the KDE desktop!
EDIT: It's on the 4th page of thumbnails.
But has anybody else noticed, that the screen shot of Solitaire with the caption of "One of the greatest time wasters of history" . . .
Is actually on . . . the KDE desktop!
EDIT: It's on the 4th page of thumbnails.
@DagonSphere
I knew something looked odd about that one. Wasn't aware that Win95 had multiple desktops!
I knew something looked odd about that one. Wasn't aware that Win95 had multiple desktops!
Ah yes, I remember it well. Windows 3.11 with Norton Desktop ! Did MS steal that ?
I preordered 95 from Staples. Picked it up on release day.
I preordered 95 from Staples. Picked it up on release day.
The screenshot of the Windows 95 boot splash is from Windows 95 OSR2 which had Internet Explorer bundled. The original release of Windows 95 did not have Internet Explorer and so did not mention it on the boot splash.
As the title says it still runs. The computer is aging and required a little thumb pressure on the frame in just the right position to eliminate the pink haze but Windows 95B still works with PC Desktop AND Norton Commander and Norton File Manager. In fact, I still use Norton File Manager even in Vista although it gives a meaningless error message. Some of those old programs were pretty good!
YES...15 Years later!
275,000 software engineers later...
57.5 Billion $$$ later...
And they STILL CAN'T design a secure & long-term stable (more than say 3 months) operating system!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yet, they have the arrogance to blow their horns that they are presently working/ making a MS product that will control your entire house!!! That's the scariest thing I've ever heard! Imagine hackers gaining control of your toilet because you forgot to download the patch!
275,000 software engineers later...
57.5 Billion $$$ later...
And they STILL CAN'T design a secure & long-term stable (more than say 3 months) operating system!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yet, they have the arrogance to blow their horns that they are presently working/ making a MS product that will control your entire house!!! That's the scariest thing I've ever heard! Imagine hackers gaining control of your toilet because you forgot to download the patch!
give me a break. give me an updated 95 or 98 OS that supports usb sata multi core etc.
imagine how friggin fast 95 would run on a quad core with 16 gb ram .!
there are trade offs, but id sort of sacrifice the aero theme for the webpage as desktop background..
there were many hidden programs in windows 95.
now they go the route of standard, premiom. ultimate crud without offering the programming tools already residing on 95.
first laptop with 95 was $2000 with a 177mhz processor.
now ive got dual 2 ghz for 1/2 the price.
sure its prettier, but lets see a side by side comparison.
zdnet must have an older model laying around.
lets do a side by side of 95 vs. win7 on startup, normal activity use, how long they run without problems.
have we really gotten better stuff now besides graphics & gaming?
imagine how friggin fast 95 would run on a quad core with 16 gb ram .!
there are trade offs, but id sort of sacrifice the aero theme for the webpage as desktop background..
there were many hidden programs in windows 95.
now they go the route of standard, premiom. ultimate crud without offering the programming tools already residing on 95.
first laptop with 95 was $2000 with a 177mhz processor.
now ive got dual 2 ghz for 1/2 the price.
sure its prettier, but lets see a side by side comparison.
zdnet must have an older model laying around.
lets do a side by side of 95 vs. win7 on startup, normal activity use, how long they run without problems.
have we really gotten better stuff now besides graphics & gaming?
Never had a problem with Windows 95 OSR2 I loved it. Ran it for years. I think most of the problems with windows over the years have been the device between the chair and the keyboard. Idiots that shouldn't own computers anyway, just like idiots on the highway. I have never had a problem with any Windows OS, and I have been building and repairing computers since before windows 95, glitches here and there with drivers and HW and SW but never had to re-install the OS when a virus wasn't present. One thing I always stay away from is NORTON software and Upgrade versions. Always used a full version to upgrade a PC..People are just morons
@Nemesis2All
Personally I don't find blaming the users for being idiots is acceptable. There have always been idiotic users. Computer systems should and usually do protect themselves from the idiots.
In my 27 years as an IT pro, working on everything from CPM micros to some of the worlds' largest mainframes, I can honestly say I have never seen an O/S simply die for any reason, apart from Windows 95/98/2000.
Personally I don't find blaming the users for being idiots is acceptable. There have always been idiotic users. Computer systems should and usually do protect themselves from the idiots.
In my 27 years as an IT pro, working on everything from CPM micros to some of the worlds' largest mainframes, I can honestly say I have never seen an O/S simply die for any reason, apart from Windows 95/98/2000.
At our panelshop we ran on dos and some use (minimal W3.1) up until we got 98se which was when they finally started releasing most PLC programming S/W in Windows.
Those were the days... ahh CLI....
Cheers
Those were the days... ahh CLI....
Cheers
Seeing a similar ZDNet article on July 24th...
The 25th Anniversary of the Amiga.
(Windows - yesterday's technology... tomorrow)
(Amiga - today's technology... yesterday)
The 25th Anniversary of the Amiga.
(Windows - yesterday's technology... tomorrow)
(Amiga - today's technology... yesterday)
And there there still people looking for the "Any" Key
How can I get the little giggle'n guys when you logged off. I love and miss that, but that's all i miss
I'm still running Win95 on a Toshiba Libretto with 32meg RAM and 512 meg hard drive. Great little word processor unit, runs AOL client pretty well, too. Amazing how little things like the Control Panel have really changed. I run Win7 with Word 2007 on my new laptop, and it doesn't help me write a better story than Win95 with Word 95 on the Libretto.
In a comment to which the site disallows direct reply, it was said...
"The idea that an entire operating system can be rendered permanently useless, with the only option being to re-install the whole lot because of something as trivial as a device driver fail is utterly unacceptable"
...and I agree with that, but that didn't happen in Win9x. Until WinME artificially broke this to mimic the limitations of NT, you always had the option to boot DOS mode instead, and fix things from there.
Common to Win9x (Vmm32.vxd) and NT (the HAL) and perhaps other OSs, is the problem of driver code required to boot the OS to the point that add-on driver integration can start to work.
If changes invalidate this core code, then the usual "fix" has been to do a new OS install to rebuild the core driver set. In Win9x, it was fairly easy to do this outside the stricken installation, and then drop the core code (Vmm32.vxd) from this "organ donor" installation into the afflicted one (again, from DOS mode).
These "core driver" issues remain headaches today, with NTFS etc. creating new complications. I'm not sure if Linux fares much better; when a new Intel motherboard chipset comes out, one may have to wait for a new version of Ubuntu so the kernel can cope with the new hardware. That can mean having to use old motherboard chipsets for "new" Ubuntu PCs, or waiting for the next Ubuntu release, or settling for a non-LTS release with shorter supported lifetime.
"The idea that an entire operating system can be rendered permanently useless, with the only option being to re-install the whole lot because of something as trivial as a device driver fail is utterly unacceptable"
...and I agree with that, but that didn't happen in Win9x. Until WinME artificially broke this to mimic the limitations of NT, you always had the option to boot DOS mode instead, and fix things from there.
Common to Win9x (Vmm32.vxd) and NT (the HAL) and perhaps other OSs, is the problem of driver code required to boot the OS to the point that add-on driver integration can start to work.
If changes invalidate this core code, then the usual "fix" has been to do a new OS install to rebuild the core driver set. In Win9x, it was fairly easy to do this outside the stricken installation, and then drop the core code (Vmm32.vxd) from this "organ donor" installation into the afflicted one (again, from DOS mode).
These "core driver" issues remain headaches today, with NTFS etc. creating new complications. I'm not sure if Linux fares much better; when a new Intel motherboard chipset comes out, one may have to wait for a new version of Ubuntu so the kernel can cope with the new hardware. That can mean having to use old motherboard chipsets for "new" Ubuntu PCs, or waiting for the next Ubuntu release, or settling for a non-LTS release with shorter supported lifetime.
No matter what ZD puts out lately there always seems to be either a direct SLAM at Apple or a commentator who uses the article to make their own SLAM. You guys STILL feeling insecure after all these years? Wonder why? (Don't bother to respond in flames. I shall be laughing from a relatively secure place).
I think it's funny they still use legacy icons for certain programs like Registry Editor. Come on. I can find TONS of better looking ones out there. But honestly, only tech guru's such as myself would even care about something like that however, still I think that MS would update some of their Icons after 15 years. No?
Yeah! Every time I hear the 'Stones "Start Me Up" and Madonna's "Ray of Light" song used in all those commercials it brings back such memories of my younger blissful days of computing! I only wish I had saved that i80486 CPU that I first ran Windows 95 on!
I experienced a burst of wonderful nostalgia when I saw the "CD Player" window. Ah, the good old days. That blew my mind the first time I saw it all those years ago.
We still have a few machines at work running Windows 95 and my girlfriend's family still have a smattering of Windows 95 (and 98) machines in use.
Most are getting replaced, because things like eBay are becoming too slow to use! :-D
Most are getting replaced, because things like eBay are becoming too slow to use! :-D
lol I just clicked on the "next" button in the image ,trying to get to the next slide...
Join the conversation!
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Vendor Showcase
Facebook Activity
