Conversation

Notices

1. Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 09:06:52 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

   it has been ZERO DAYS since I have installed Windows 95

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 09:08:37 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     I need to search my own timeline and hard drive and figure out how often I do this. It's... frighteningly often. I think once a month is the lowest I ever manage, and there was one day where I did it something like 40 times in one day. I had to write an automation system to install it for me

   • William D. Jones (cr1901@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 09:16:36 JST William D. Jones

     in reply to

     @foone I thought Win95 in DOSBOX was unsupported (not that it stopped me in the past :P) :D

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 09:16:36 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • William D. Jones

     @cr1901 it's unsupported in regular DOSBox, but it seems to work well enough in DOSBox-X and there's a guide on how to install it

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 09:34:26 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     the palette of "It's now safe to turn off your computer" is interesting.
     It's basically greyscale, but in shades of orangey-brown, except color 0 is black and color 255 is white.

     Color 0 being black makes sense for CRT-border reasons, but why not just set up the palette so that the darkest color is 0?
     also, why white? there's no white in this image.

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 09:54:53 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • Solarbird :flag_cascadia:

     @moira yeah, debug output would make a lot of sense

   • Solarbird :flag_cascadia: (moira@mastodon.murkworks.net)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 09:54:54 JST Solarbird :flag_cascadia:

     in reply to

     @foone Maybe white (or black even) is used as a placeholder for transparency?

   • Solarbird :flag_cascadia: (moira@mastodon.murkworks.net)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 09:54:54 JST Solarbird :flag_cascadia:

     in reply to

     @foone Oh! OR: maybe white is used in the debug builds for debug output at shutdown. _Not_ taking it out is one less code change between test and ship.

     That's definitely the kind of thing we'd've done.

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 10:00:31 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     it has been zero days since I crashed DOSBox-X

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 10:19:10 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     interesting discovery:

     this boot screen is running at 70hz.

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 10:21:40 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     which makes sense, a lot of DOS resolutions did, but it's still odd to see, in our future where 60hz is the default and we only see more than that in rare gaming circumstances

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 10:26:34 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • Andrew Zonenberg

     @azonenberg yeah. I remember using 1024x768 at 100hz back in the day, because that 19" CRT would flicker like mad at 60hz

   • Andrew Zonenberg (azonenberg@ioc.exchange)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 10:26:35 JST Andrew Zonenberg

     in reply to

     @foone We used to run the display on my parent's Windows Mistake Edition box at 85 Hz. Significantly less visible flicker than 60.

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 11:22:38 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     I've annotated the Windows 95 boot animation: The screen doesn't update any pixels once it's initially drawn, instead the VGA palette just has a subsection (colors 236-255) that's rotated, saving on CPU cycles during the loading screen.

     This is animated at the correct speed: 7 frames at 70hz, so 0.1 seconds per frame

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 11:24:32 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     And here's the same animation but lowered to 0.5s/frame

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 11:44:07 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • Justin Davenport

     @jad_va ahh yeah, around Build 347:
     https://betawiki.net/wiki/Windows_95_build_347

   • Justin Davenport (jad_va@infosec.exchange)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 11:44:08 JST Justin Davenport

     in reply to

     @foone If I remember correctly, one of the betas (after dropping the Chicago branding for Windows 95) had ◀️ animation that went across the bottom of the screen. Probably used the same palette cycling?

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 12:02:28 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     the day isn't over and I'm installing it again. A different version, at least

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Monday, 08-Jan-2024 12:04:27 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     and I'm not even done installing and I just realized I'm gonna need to do it again

   • vxo (vxo@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 00:47:44 JST vxo

     in reply to

     @foone something I have wondered about for years: I thought I saw a mention somewhere about that screen being a bitmap image, but I distinctly remember having it glitch out on a really early version of Windows 95 and some extra text displayed over it in a really wide pixelated font. It said something like
     whenLevel(
     keyNumber

     I have never seen this happen again since but it always suggested to me that this was just text being rendered in a funky low res font. Was that the case?

   • Rairii (rairii@haqueers.com)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 02:09:49 JST Rairii

     in reply to

     @foone oh, you didn't mean to install build 347?

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 02:09:49 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • Rairii

     @Rairii no I installed the right version, but I forgot to take screenshots during the install process. It has different images than the RTM

   • Jernej Simončič � (jernej__s@infosec.exchange)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 02:12:36 JST Jernej Simončič �

     in reply to

     @foone What are you trying to do?
     I only installed Windows 95 twice this weekend.

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 02:12:36 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • Jernej Simončič �

     @jernej__s extracting the boot logo, and also the installer images

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 02:49:12 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • vxo

     @vxo yeah I'm not sure about that one, but this resolution was supposedly picked to be able to easily drop back to text mode on error. I know a lot of DOS extender programs ended up with fat-font errors when they crashed, but I can't recall win95 ever doing it

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 02:51:33 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • Jernej Simončič �

     @jernej__s makes sense. It often goes text->graphics->text->graphics, and early multisyncs were REALLY slow at resolution switching

   • Jernej Simončič � (jernej__s@infosec.exchange)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 02:51:34 JST Jernej Simončič �

     in reply to

     @foone Boot screen should run with the same timings as text mode; this was done so displays could switch between the boot logo and config.sys/autoexec.bat text without monitor going dark (which is why boot screen uses such weird 320x400 resolution).

   • vxo (vxo@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 02:53:42 JST vxo

     in reply to

     @foone I wonder if that might have been another program that was still running at the time that doodled on top of it. It was really odd and I never saw it happen again after that.

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 06:18:54 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     And here's the animation from the Windows 95 build 347 Final Beta Release, which has a completely different boot throbber.

     only 9 palette entries this time.

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 06:23:14 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     And the 1/5th speed version

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 06:46:37 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • felsqualle

     @felsqualle it's just a BMP file, with some limitations on size/palette

   • felsqualle (felsqualle@manitu.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 06:46:38 JST felsqualle

     in reply to

     @foone Still wondering how they managed to allow arbitrary bitmap files to be used for a custom LOGO.SYS file...

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 07:07:30 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     arg. the windows 95 installer and the windows 95 final-beta installer use SLIGHTLY different sizes of installer windows.

     It's 545x319 on the RTM version, and 526x309 on the final-beta version!

   • RetroSwim (retroswim@bitbang.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 09:12:07 JST RetroSwim

     in reply to

     @foone I unironically love this version of the bootscreen. Way cooler than the final bar design IMO.

   • Foone🏳️‍⚧️ (foone@digipres.club)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Jan-2024 09:12:07 JST Foone🏳️‍⚧️

     in reply to

     • RetroSwim

     @retroswim yeah, it's lovely. I think it's kinda better than the final release, I wish they'd kept it, maybe with some more colors to make the arrows smother?