You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
39 points

It’s not stable, but it will boot and run … most of the time.

Pretty much my recollection of running Windows NT on x86.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

60% of the time, it works every time.

Of course, 60% was a hell of a lot more than 95 managed, so still impressive?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

NT 3.5 wasn’t too bad.

NT4 moved a lot of stuff into the kernel that wasn’t ready for prime time and we suffered for it, at least on NT Workstation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

To expand, Windows NT was originally a microkernel system where all the drivers were in userspace. This is more stable but ended up being very slow. With NT 4, they started moving drivers into the kernel and it was really buggy in the beginning. It wasn’t until NT 4 SP3 that it was usable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

4.0 was my first exposure to NT - I used systems running 3.5 a few times, but not enough to have any real opinion on it. I did know there had been big architectural changes, but that was all. I have no difficulty believing 3.5 was better though.

permalink
report
parent
reply

retrocomputing

!retrocomputing@lemmy.sdf.org

Create post

Discussions on vintage and retrocomputing

Community stats

  • 247

    Monthly active users

  • 295

    Posts

  • 1.6K

    Comments