Tom's Guide | Tom's Hardware | Tom's Games
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
What file is the file on disc 1 that is the boot-up file? I got the whole thing off of MSDN, but it is non-bootable.

Win 3.X disk 1 is not bootable.You run setup from the dos prompt.If you have no dos system try the Wengier dos 7.1 install set.It is compatible with Windows 3.11.
http://newdos.yginfo.net/msdos71/
Good luck.

or get a bootdisk from bootdisk.com
a 95 bootdisk will work and give you a splash screen if you like trying to make 3.1 look like 95... other wise get a dos 6.22 bootdisk

>>>a 95 bootdisk will work and give you a splash screen if you like trying to make 3.1 look like 95... other wise get a dos 6.22 bootdisk<<<
You may be able to boot a system to a prompt with a '95 boot disk, but you cannot install Win3.x with it. You need some version of DOS installed (like Petit Jean said, Wengier's version should work if you don't have MSDOS 3.3-6.22).

The Windows 95 Bootdisk is a version of DOS! Its MS-DOS 7.0 since Win9x is still a GUI that lives on top of DOS....
Even Wengier's MS-DOS 7.10 is little more than a hacked version of the Windows 98/98se Bootdisk with added utilities. I do recommend it none the less!
The minimum DOS utiliies you may need use to run Windows 3.x are.
System Files installed on C:\ Drive
(IO.SYS, MSDOS.SYS & COMMAND.COM)
Utilities:
FDISK, FORMAT & SYS (if needed)
HIMEM.SYS & EMM386.SYS
Autoexec.Bat & Config.Sys
(You will need to write these yourself if you do not use an installable version of DOS)
EDIT to create or Edit above files
CD-ROM Driver & MSCDEX
Mouse Driver only if needed for use under DOS
Other device drivers as needed.and that is about it!
You do not even need HIMEM.SYS & EMM386.SYS as Windows 3x comes with its own copies, but they are older versions from MS-DOS 5.0 and 6.22 or 7.10 versions are better.
Please reply with a message to let us all know we are on the right track...

yup, and don't tell me i can't for the last time!!! many people have said this and once agian i must tell you, IT WORKS FINE!! i have done it before no problems... and so every that didn't know before knows now, windows is not an OS unless its NT. XP, 2000, 2003, long horn, all windows OS, not ME, 98, or 95. ok got that? good

Windows 95 onwards are classed as an OS becouse it is supplied as a complete embedded package (Out of the box) Some would say wrongly!
Windows versions upto 3.11 were only ever classed as a Graphical User Interface (GUI) becouse you had to buy and install a version of DOS first, before continuing.
Combined DOS/Windows packages were available at the time, But still as 2 differant disk setsWindows 98/98se System Bootdisks need to be patched with 3xStart (Wengiers MS-DOS 7.10 is patched for you) But I provide a patched 7.10 bootdisk on my PowerLoad Bootdisk Project page as well.
For examples of lean DOS installs, look no further than the 'Mini Windows 3.1' projects,
An example of which can be found on Wengiers page@http://newdos.yginfo.net/msdos71/index.htm
Please reply with a message to let us all know we are on the right track...

Mick C is correct...regardless of whatever the facts may or may not be, M$ decided that , since MS-Dos was "embedded" in the win95 install, that the win 95 and up packages were now "OSs"..
If you disagree take it up with Mr. Gates...Running a gui over dos is not necessarily a "bad thing", in my opinion...gives you a chance to improve the gui without messing with a framework ( Dos) that is rock solid , and having had several NT , OS2 and UNIX (great server, nightmare desktop OS) nightmares have reverted on PC's back to dos-based systems, and furthermore if it's good enough for the space program and the military it's good enough for me....

what ever, its regardless of what M$ says its still not an OS... i don't care anymore...if its easier to stick with this then do it...

![]() |
![]() |
![]() |

This post is quite old and has been locked from receiving new replies. Please create a new posting instead.
| Ads by Google |