Exploring Win NT 3.51

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 97

  • @danielrbsutton
    @danielrbsutton 3 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    NT 3.51 was referred to as the "PowerPC release," since it supprted the PowerPC processor as well as some other RISC processors. NT has come full circle since Windows now supports ARM processors, which are today's RISC machines!

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      Indeed you're correct! We're back at the start again haha

  • @TonyPombo
    @TonyPombo 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +4

    There were many minor enhancements to NT 3.51, but the main reason for this release was for Windows 95 compatibility. It added the "Win95 common controls" and support files. This was needed for applications written for Win95 to work on NT, like Office 97 and those games you showed.
    About a year before NT 4.0 was released, MS provided a "Shell Preview" for NT 3.51 that replaced Program Manager & File Manager with a nearly complete Explorer shell. It looked almost identical to Win85, but was buggy. It crashed a lot but was good enough that I used it daily only my work computer for a over year until NT 4.0 released.
    Thanks for the nostalgia.

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      i believe you can still have the file manager and program manager in NT4, you can select it during installation. I am yet to have a play with that. I think the massive enhancement to 3.51 was processor support, the earlier versions were not keen on Pentium Pro processors.

    • @TonyPombo
      @TonyPombo 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@procta2343 I know File Manager was included with Windows for several years. Maybe removed in NT 5.1?
      I don't know if Program Manager was included in NT4.
      Let me know if you figure it out :)

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      @ I think the program manager is still with NT4, i think you can set that when you install NT4, i dont think you can change it once NT4 is setup
      I think anything to do with the 3.x days may have been binned off by then when they built windows 2000 it certainly was when Windows XP was launched.

    • @lucasrem
      @lucasrem 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@TonyPombo NT 3.51 was HandleEx 2.1, Process Explorer 10.06 was 95

    • @TonyPombo
      @TonyPombo 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@lucasrem Thanks for sharing, but I honestly don't know what you are referring to. 🤷

  • @_chrisr_
    @_chrisr_ 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +10

    The company I joined in 1995 had developed a complete business platform that ran on NT 3.1 and when I joined had been going through upgrade from 3.5 to 3.51 - 3.1 was very unstable and was improved considerably on 3.5 but even so we had regular crashes then 3.51 was solid. I had 3.51 workstation on my PC although most users were running Windows for Workgroups (Win 3.11) and we had roaming profiles that we developed internally. We used Microsoft Mail with the mail client too. MS Mail used a shared folder based server so was prone to corruptions - but it could do mail relaying between orgs which was good -but didn't support SMTP directly - but gateways were available. We had SQL Server 4 as well as custom application servers. Great days!

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      From my brief testing, I found NT 3.5 to be buggy but saw a vast improvement with the update to 3.51. That would have been quite a sys admin role to maintain and manage those servers! Did you guys use boot floppy's as well?

    • @_chrisr_
      @_chrisr_ 12 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@thesmokingcap We had around 70 servers over two sites and RDP wasn't a thing (and the servers didn't have remote control) so admin was done using combination what tools were available and the occasional site visit. We had people travelling daily to the other site to pick up backup tapes etc as well. The install process was from three floppies plus a driver disk to load the RAID drivers and a HAL disk as the servers were from NCR who provided a customised HAL to support the multi processor machines. The servers had typically 128MB RAM and we mostly had them booting from external RAID units which were as big as the server with 20 1GB disks mostly configured into two LUNs in RAID 5. I recall that the RAID boxes had two SCSI busses on them so we shared the one box between two servers. This was over a 7 year period and by the time I left we had upgraded to NT4.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  11 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@_chrisr_ Wow that gear would have cost a fortune!! It would have been awesome seeing the technology change. But then again, the rate of change was rather fast.

    • @_chrisr_
      @_chrisr_ 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@thesmokingcap yup - I remember buying one and it came in at just over £40k. When Dell and Compaq started selling comparable spec machines we could pick up a decent machine for less than half that. The early Dell PowerEdge range was great and for simple requirements under £2k. I even had a PowerEdge dual processor server as my workstation in 1997 or 98. Visual Studio flew on that.

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 11 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @ It was stated that NT 3.1 and 3.5 were not keen on the pentium pro processors, you have got to do some work around or something like that during installation, which i can see it been a right faff on. So i can see NT 3.1 and 3.5 getting binned off very quickly as soon as NT 3.51 came out.

  • @niklas.h.eriksson
    @niklas.h.eriksson 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    I had Windows NT on my DELL workstation at work back in the day ! Thanks for the nice video, brings back old memories !

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Did you use the New Shell with NT3x back then? Or just moved to NT4 after a while? Glad you enjoyed 😊

  • @judewestburner
    @judewestburner 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +4

    I really came in at the NT4 level. Previous to this I was a NetWare guy, and even though the love and nostalgia was on the NetWare side for many folk, for me I thought Windows NT was just in a different league.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      The changes in NT4 with the policy editor and other components seemed to really provide a strong offering to compete with Novell. I can see why Novell was a huge presence back then

    • @judewestburner
      @judewestburner 12 วันที่ผ่านมา

      ​@@thesmokingcap I was a very young man back then; in '98 (when I switched from NetWare to NT) was when I first worked for an organisation that had gone all in on NT4, and it became apparent to me very quickly that the bias was more like a religious dogma than reality. That was for a major UK bank and I saw applications doing unbelievable things that NetWare could not even imagine - and it was just jaw dropping. The difference was exactly that - 'Applications'. NetWare for me just never really could compete with running server applications meaning every day the platform was worth more to the company than the day before as it could literally do more for the company.

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      @judewestburner NT4 was the very 1st OS that introduced me to networking, I managed to get my hands on a copy of the workstation and server, 22 years ago. I had two PCs, one i built as a server machine and another as a desktop. Got two network cards and a crossover cable. I learned more that night, with those two machines with NT4, than i ever did on the ICT Tech course i was doing at the time. NT pointed me in the direction to go Microsoft, which i later did with windows XP and 2003 server. never got me anyway though 🤣

    • @judewestburner
      @judewestburner 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @ Aha lessons for life :)

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@procta2343 Hands on with a little reference material is the way I learn. I can't read for more than 10 minutes before my brain shuts down haha. Also watching changes in real time is valuable

  • @RetroTechChris
    @RetroTechChris 13 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Great! Love how you pushed it to the limits with those later software versions. And MS Works under NT is not something I thought I would ever see 🤣

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      There is some 16bit support but is a little limited. I can see why more corporate machines moved to NT as it does offer some desired features. NT4 would have been a game changer

  • @Salfordian
    @Salfordian 9 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Used to play Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 at work on NT4, helped get me through the night

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      A few more games supported with NT4 as well! I haven't tired Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 on NT4 before, I do have it on my shelf, but didn't know is supported NT4. I see it supports Win98 and Win2K so might sneak in between the gap

  • @EnronnSierra
    @EnronnSierra 8 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    I picked up a copy of Windows NT 3.1 Workstation, new in box shrinked wrapped. Really excited, I paid a pretty penny for it too, but want to add it to my collection. No plans to even pull it since I already have it setup in a VM.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      That's a nice one to have in the collection. It's not that common!

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 วันที่ผ่านมา

      I have NT 3.51 but not NT 3.1, in fact i don't think i have ever seen it for sale at all.

  • @jensen6735
    @jensen6735 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    I really love the mouse Pad!👍👍

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Thanks! It was a gift from a good friend of mine. I think he bought it from MouseRug.com

  • @markborchers6613
    @markborchers6613 13 วันที่ผ่านมา +5

    Ugh... if you REALLY want to see limitations, try Windows NT 3.1! It's amazing that 1) the product was released given it's lack of software and limitations, and 2) its hardware requirements and what hardware people had access to.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      It would have been early days for sure. There memory requirements were large for back in the day. Breaking new ground is never easy

    • @emonk042
      @emonk042 12 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Especially for USB devices like mice

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  11 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@emonk042 Is there a USB stack for NT 3.51? I've ended up using PS2 adapters to USB to get around this

  • @pedroroberto4109
    @pedroroberto4109 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    I think NT 3.1, 3.5 and 3.51 are underrated, and Windows 95 and NT 4 are overrated. A lot of people today think Windows 95 was the precursor of what we have today, and when you ask people about Windows NT, all they think about is NT 4. The Windows 95 “lineage” ended on Windows ME, the last DOS-based version of Windows (95, 98, 98SE and ME are all still DOS-based, just like Windows 3.1). Windows NT 4 is far from the first of its kind, it was the fourth. NT 3.1 is the real beginning of what became the Windows versions we use today.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  11 วันที่ผ่านมา

      It's quite interesting seeing some of the technology that provided foundations we use today, from such a long time ago. I can see why from a general public perception, consumer versions were more popular. Given some of those heavy system requirements. But still fascinating to explore the past!

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @pedroroberto4109 I have a sneaky feeling that NT 3.x was short lived compared to window NT4, windows 3.11 and windows 95. You try getting hardware that supports windows NT3.x you will be very hard pushed compared to windows NT4, windows 3.11 and windows 95. I have only seen network cards and the odd graphics card that supports NT 3.51 driver wise, and i think that is the S3 graphics cards. I know NT 3.51 sees the one i have in the system, and tries to add the driver it has for it, but the card is too new for NT 3.51s driver database. It just seems that every hardware manufacture just stopped supporting NT 3.x as soon as NT4 came out, and people just seem to " forget" about windows NT 3.x and just talk about NT4.

    • @lucasrem
      @lucasrem 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      You need Winsock back, muhahahahaha

    • @lucasrem
      @lucasrem 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@procta2343 If System were running on NT 3.51, why upgrade it, many services kept on running on them !

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      @@procta2343 I can see why NT4 stole the spotlight. 1993 to 1995. NT4 comes out with the same easy to use UI as Win95. Much better hardware support as well as far better Domain Controller add-ons like system policy. The investment into NT4 would have been worth it for quite a while, maybe even until Server 2K3!?

  • @classicnosh
    @classicnosh 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    I used NT 3.51 on my Compaq Deskpro, I was able to update it to NT 4.0 but I remember 3.51 being very stable. I had some minor issues with my NT 4.0 until SP4 came out.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Ahh yes. A few service packs to get things stable. Would have been interesting moving from NT3x to NT4!

  • @tenminutetokyo2643
    @tenminutetokyo2643 9 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Ah yes the good old days. Before the chaos.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Before subscription services and changing cloud systems every 6 months

  • @emonk042
    @emonk042 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    3.51 was ok, but 4.0 was much better, except you needed 12megs of ram. Our NT3.51 server had a digiboard in it, that has 8 built in modems that we used for dialup. We could circumvent Novell limitations as well by only needing a single user instead of licenses for multiple users. 6 service patches later, it was stable.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  11 วันที่ผ่านมา

      I can see more recognizable technology in NT 4. Novell would have been pretty sought after tech back then! Was it a dial in server I take it?

    • @emonk042
      @emonk042 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      @@thesmokingcap Yes. And a web server, file server, print server .... pretty much did everything

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      @@emonk042 Back when servers with Physical as well, would have been fun if it fell over haha. I recall this happening at my High school and having to wait for the PDC to boot up

  • @markkoops2611
    @markkoops2611 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    Your PC had 4MB back then if you could afford it.
    I sold PCs back then and ext a 4MB upgrade for a Pentium was roughly $300

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      I've heard how expensive memory was back in the early 90's. It would have been eye watering to get to those recommend requirements

    • @nickwallette6201
      @nickwallette6201 8 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา

      I bought an AST Advantage Pro 486SX/25 in ... '93(?) which shipped with 2MB of RAM and an 80MB HDD. That was what you could get for a grand at the time, plus another two bills for a 1024x768 interlaced monitor. The 4MB RAM upgrade was a hundred sixty-five.

  • @upgrade1373
    @upgrade1373 13 วันที่ผ่านมา

    I started on v4, thanks for this.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Sounds like you got in at a good time. What was the move from NT4 to 2000 like for you? It would have been full on!

  • @morphoist
    @morphoist 13 วันที่ผ่านมา

    I still use a box for graphics work. There was a 3D text programme called "Crystal Flying Fonts" rather basic by todays standards.. but it's great at doing fly on and fly off text.. Been going well for years! It's been updated and will run on W2000.. but I stayed with the version I have as it just works for what I want.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      What sort of machine did you run this on? Sounds like it would have been ground breaking software back in the day!

    • @morphoist
      @morphoist 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      @@thesmokingcap It's a P166 with 64 megs of RAM. It still has its original 1gig HD. At the time it was an expensive machine. It also has Premiere 4.2 and After Effects 3.1

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@morphoist Oh wow!! that would have been very expensive back in the day. Especially a rig that could handle video work with those encoder cards!

  • @procta2343
    @procta2343 12 วันที่ผ่านมา

    i have had a play with this and the server counter part. Problem i have found, is that there are very little driver support for it, with later hardware compared to windows NT4 etc. I have a printer that supports windows 3.11 msdos and NT4, but no support at all for windows NT 3.x. I am suspecting that it was short lived compared to NT4. I know the server counter part can deploy and remote boot windows 95, and i think it can also remote boot windows 3.11 or one of the variants. Where NT4 i they just kept the support for windows 95 and MSDOS> Great OS to play with, and there is a lot of under hood stuff that ended up in NT4. It fuckin flies on a dual Processor Pentium 3 with 4 gig of ram. Just a shame i cannot get some of the drivers for the PCI cards, only the network card support i have sadly.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      Ahhh yes. Back when hardware had to be validated to work with an OS. I found the same with NT4, much better hardware and software support

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 11 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@thesmokingcap Its mad, you would have thought 3.51 would have same sort of support NT4 had, as microsoft still supported it right up till the year 2001 and 2002 for the server side.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@procta2343 I was reading up on some docs to upgrade our Domain Level at work and saw NT4.0 PDC's still being referenced in 2025 documentation haha

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @ mad that, to think NT4 is still been referenced 20 years later after it was binned off by microsoft. Shows you how strong NT4 is still. Also i still recon its still used today, not hardware based but VMware based

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@procta2343 Yeah I did get a surprise when I was reading the doc. But I guess quite a lot of the technology we still use today

  • @nickwallette6201
    @nickwallette6201 8 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา

    "A bit like Descent" -- I would say it's a bit like Terminal Velocity. ;-)

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  8 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา

      I've never played Terminal Velocity, looks very very similar it seems. I'll have to play it!

    • @nickwallette6201
      @nickwallette6201 7 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา

      @@thesmokingcap Yeah, this is literally TV ported from MS-DOS to Windows. I think they may have changed a few missions, and the music is different, but it's the same game engine and assets.
      BTW, what demo disc did you use? Kaleidoscope seems familiar... kinda want to check that out.

  • @Nico93
    @Nico93 13 วันที่ผ่านมา

    how are you capturing the vga out? ive been leaning on that myself.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา

      I have a card called DataPath. I have a video somewhere on my channel

  • @kahvikissa_
    @kahvikissa_ 13 วันที่ผ่านมา

    thats one you don't see every day. everyone knows nt 4 but this one seems a bit forgotten

    • @drygnfyre
      @drygnfyre 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      This was the one and only Windows release to work on PowerPC. It did it even before Apple.

    • @judewestburner
      @judewestburner 12 วันที่ผ่านมา

      3.51 or 4?

    • @drygnfyre
      @drygnfyre 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @ 3.51 was the only NT release that supported PowerPC. It was short lived and didn't see much use.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@drygnfyre I would love to give it a try on a PowerPC or Alpha machine but don't own any of those.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@drygnfyre Oh really!? I thought NT 4.0 did as well? I recall reading something about IBM taking too long to deliver the new CPU's

  • @JonWhitton
    @JonWhitton 13 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Most changes needed a reboot, I remember 3.51 and NT4 well!

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      Funny for what we take for granted nowadays

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 11 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      I was told of my Microsoft Lecture, when i was doing Windows 2003 server, He said any changes to the system, you had to re run the service packs. As it would put the old files in place rather than the newer files. what i do, is get the system up to service pack 4, do my changes and lock the full system off with the last service pack.

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  2 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      @@procta2343 Interesting, I have seen a bug with Windows XP that I'm trying to recall. It had something to do with new hardware wouldn't install signed drivers or something. Reinstalling SP3 at the time fixed it. It was 2009 so trying to recall what the exact problem was. But sounds a like a similar issue haha

    • @procta2343
      @procta2343 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @ oddly enough i think there is a bug with windows 2000, which also carried over to windows XP and server counter part, is the dual processor MPS feature, one some chip sets. A bloke on here, installed windows 2000 on a dual processor asus board, and had some error in the events to do with the soft power off feature, He tried a BIOS update, which didn't do anything, so he set the system to standard. I had the same issue with another asus board too, from that era, i think his was slightly older chip set than mine. So there is a bug there, or it could be what my microsoft lecture was meaning, by tuning dual processor systems, NT 3.51 and NT4 don't seem to give a shit, but then again the plug in play feature wasn't really there.

  • @potsatajaja
    @potsatajaja 12 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Nice. Get a new mic once the views pick up 😊

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  12 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      I had it too close to my face 😂

    • @lucasrem
      @lucasrem 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      You Donate it ?

  • @8BitNaptime
    @8BitNaptime 13 วันที่ผ่านมา

    its, not it's

    • @thesmokingcap
      @thesmokingcap  11 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Ahh, Updated now.

    • @8BitNaptime
      @8BitNaptime 11 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@thesmokingcap The Grammar Police thanks you.