On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 16:12:43 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 20:33:14 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>
>> We're always told to upgrade to something newer because it's more
>> secure, but then a new version of that thing comes along and suddenly
>> the version that was fine yesterday is unusable today.
>
>Windows 3.1 is apparently still available:

Cool, do you have a link? I wonder if it's available as a VM image.

>https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/topic/windows-installer-3-1-v2-3-1-4000-2435-is-available-e3978d9b-5fbf-bfec-71b9-1a463290065a
>
>-is that still usable?

No, that appears to be a program called Windows Installer.

On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:03:08 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid>
wrote:

>On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 16:12:43 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 20:33:14 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>>
>>> We're always told to upgrade to something newer because it's more
>>> secure, but then a new version of that thing comes along and suddenly
>>> the version that was fine yesterday is unusable today.
>>
>>Windows 3.1 is apparently still available:
>
>Cool, do you have a link? I wonder if it's available as a VM image.
>
>>https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/topic/windows-installer-3-1-v2-3-1-4000-2435-is-available-e3978d9b-5fbf-bfec-71b9-1a463290065a
>>
>>-is that still usable?
>
>No, that appears to be a program called Windows Installer.

I think I have a set of install diskettes that work. I used them a
couple years ago to put W/3.1 on this machine along with a bootable
DOS 6.3 and my suite of old programs.
I think I could just zip the windows directory and it would work tho.
Windows wasn't really "installed" in the 95 and up sense. You just
need to add windows to your path and "win" to your autoexec.

On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:03:08 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

> No, that appears to be a program called Windows Installer.

OOps, I see I searched for 'Windows 3.1 Installer' (interpreted as
'windows-installer 3.1') rather than 'windows 3.1 download'. Try:

https://archive.org/details/windows-3.1_202011

Instructions on running that in a virtual machine on that page.

On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 13:05:16 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
wrote:

>On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:03:08 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>
>> No, that appears to be a program called Windows Installer.
>
>OOps, I see I searched for 'Windows 3.1 Installer' (interpreted as
>'windows-installer 3.1') rather than 'windows 3.1 download'. Try:
>
>https://archive.org/details/windows-3.1_202011
>
>Instructions on running that in a virtual machine on that page.

Thanks.

On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 08:56:38 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 13:05:16 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:03:08 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>>
>>> No, that appears to be a program called Windows Installer.
>>
>>OOps, I see I searched for 'Windows 3.1 Installer' (interpreted as
>>'windows-installer 3.1') rather than 'windows 3.1 download'. Try:
>>
>>https://archive.org/details/windows-3.1_202011
>>
>>Instructions on running that in a virtual machine on that page.
>
> Thanks.

Just to follow up, I just installed DOS6.22 and Windows 3.11 to see
if that was easy today . It took a little messing about but
eventually I downloaded the three image files for DOS and the nine
disk image files for Windows 3.11. For reference I used:

https://archive.org/details/MS_DOS_6.22_MICROSOFT
https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-3/wfw-311

- for the various files. Virtualbox makes it easy to load these
floppy disk images one by one (3 DOS and 9 Windows 3.11). There are
other links on the web but these worked for me.

Amazing what we put up with in the 1990s. Although the look and feel
is dated, much of the methods and design assumptions are still with
us today.

On 12/22/2021 10:20 AM, mechanic wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 08:56:38 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 13:05:16 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:03:08 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>
>>>> No, that appears to be a program called Windows Installer.
>>>
>>>OOps, I see I searched for 'Windows 3.1 Installer' (interpreted as
>>>'windows-installer 3.1') rather than 'windows 3.1 download'. Try:
>>>
>>>https://archive.org/details/windows-3.1_202011
>>>
>>>Instructions on running that in a virtual machine on that page.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> Just to follow up, I just installed DOS6.22 and Windows 3.11 to see
> if that was easy today . It took a little messing about but
> eventually I downloaded the three image files for DOS and the nine
> disk image files for Windows 3.11. For reference I used:
>
> https://archive.org/details/MS_DOS_6.22_MICROSOFT
> https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-3/wfw-311

That second URL is about Windows for Workgroups 3.11, *not* Windows
3.11. They were two different things. Please be careful not to mix them up.

On 12/22/2021 8:05, mechanic wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:03:08 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>
>> No, that appears to be a program called Windows Installer.
>
> OOps, I see I searched for 'Windows 3.1 Installer' (interpreted as
> 'windows-installer 3.1') rather than 'windows 3.1 download'. Try:
>
> https://archive.org/details/windows-3.1_202011
>
> Instructions on running that in a virtual machine on that page.

Ah, I have a few sets of Windows 3.x on floppies here ;)

On 20 Dec 2021 15:42:06 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> And then there's Windows 8.1, which isn't quite as bad as some people
> say it is. (I'm running 8.1 for well over six years.)

So have I. All I did to customize it was install and configure
Classic Shell.

> And also Windows
> 10/11 can be beaten into submission and look/work like Real Windows (TM).

That's an adventure I'm just starting on, with the new Windows 10 Pro
desktop PC that arrived Monday.

So far Windows 10 doesn't seem as awful as I expected. But it's
pretty creepy that the solitaire games show ads customized to
Tehachapi. I didn't sign in using a Microsoft account, so I can't
imagine how Windows knows.

--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
https://OakRoadSystems.com/
Shikata ga nai...

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2021 15:42:06 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > And then there's Windows 8.1, which isn't quite as bad as some people
> > say it is. (I'm running 8.1 for well over six years.)

> So have I. All I did to customize it was install and configure
> Classic Shell.

The biggest issue with W8 was its annoying mouse gestures for PCs.

> > And also Windows
> > 10/11 can be beaten into submission and look/work like Real Windows (TM).

> That's an adventure I'm just starting on, with the new Windows 10 Pro
> desktop PC that arrived Monday.

> So far Windows 10 doesn't seem as awful as I expected. But it's
> pretty creepy that the solitaire games show ads customized to
> Tehachapi. I didn't sign in using a Microsoft account, so I can't
> imagine how Windows knows.

I still don't like W10. :(
--
Dang coldness, colony, works, leaks, mess, z, software upgrades, free games, spams, (scam/fraud)s, greeds, inflations, illnesses, body, life, craziness, BUSYness, etc. again. :( Happy Holidays / Season's Greetings / Merry Christmas / etc. though. *<|:D
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

mechanic <mechanic@example.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 08:56:38 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

> > On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 13:05:16 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 12:03:08 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
> >>
> >>> No, that appears to be a program called Windows Installer.
> >>
> >>OOps, I see I searched for 'Windows 3.1 Installer' (interpreted as
> >>'windows-installer 3.1') rather than 'windows 3.1 download'. Try:
> >>
> >>https://archive.org/details/windows-3.1_202011
> >>
> >>Instructions on running that in a virtual machine on that page.
> >
> > Thanks.

> Just to follow up, I just installed DOS6.22 and Windows 3.11 to see
> if that was easy today . It took a little messing about but
> eventually I downloaded the three image files for DOS and the nine
> disk image files for Windows 3.11. For reference I used:

> https://archive.org/details/MS_DOS_6.22_MICROSOFT
> https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-3/wfw-311

> - for the various files. Virtualbox makes it easy to load these
> floppy disk images one by one (3 DOS and 9 Windows 3.11). There are
> other links on the web but these worked for me.

> Amazing what we put up with in the 1990s. Although the look and feel
> is dated, much of the methods and design assumptions are still with
> us today.

Try Windows 95. I had a hard time getting that installed and working due
to errors. :(
--
Dang coldness, colony, works, leaks, mess, z, software upgrades, free games, spams, (scam/fraud)s, greeds, inflations, illnesses, body, life, craziness, BUSYness, etc. again. :( Happy Holidays / Season's Greetings / Merry Christmas / etc. though. *<|:D
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:15:12 -0500, Michael Trew
<michael.trew@att.net> wrote:

>On 12/20/2021 8:40, John wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:44:01 -0800, Stan Brown
>> <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 16:55:02 -0500, Master Yoda wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Did anyone had problems after Windows 7 support ended on January 14, 2020 ?
>>>
>>> No, but then it ended for me when they started bundling "upgrade to
>>> Windows 10" and "telemetry" nags into so-called security updates.
>>
>> Sometime around then, I stopped Win-Update and BITS. Win-7 still runs
>> fine. I'll get rid of it when the machine it's on dies. Meanwhile, it
>> runs happily.
>>
>> I'll be sad when the Win-7 box does die because that's the one I use
>> to run Forté's Agent on and without Agent I'll be unwilling to browse
>> Usenet.
>>
>> I know there are other [some would say "better"] tools but I like
>> Agent so when WIn-7 dies, Usenet does, too.
>>
>> That'll be sad as I've been helped by you guys for decades.
>>
>> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
>> happy New Year.
>
>I keep hearing about this Forte Agent. I just use Thunderbird. What is
>the benefit to that newsreader?

Today? Possibly none, save that Agent is usually smaller and faster
due to it being less bloated though with today's machinery those are
mostly moot.

Years ago? Agent was a far better Usenet reader but a far poorer
email agent so many people used Agent for Usenet and Eudora, T/bird,
Outlook or something else for email.

I still do that. Why? Because I do. It works for me.

If it doesn't work for you, then don't use it. :)

Merry Christmass.

J.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:17:57 -0500, Michael Trew
<michael.trew@att.net> wrote:

>On 12/20/2021 10:53, John wrote:
>> I'd hesitate to ever connect the XP box to the 'Net live without
>> hardening it a*lot*. Hardening a "new" Win-7 box would be almost as
>> foolish.
>
>Have some fun, and connect a Dos 6.2/Windows 3.11 workgroups machine up
>with a TCP/IP packet and an old Ethernet card. Find an old version of
>your newsreader, and that can be your dedicated Usenet machine ;)

Thank you for the suggestion but that is just too much like hard
work.

I'm *very* retired.

>
>(I've had one online in the past year, and I've honestly thought about
>it, just for fun).

Enjoy!

Me, I'm lazy. :)

Merry Christmas.

J.

On 12/24/2021 9:27 PM, John wrote:

> Years ago? Agent was a far better Usenet reader but a far poorer
> email agent so many people used Agent for Usenet and Eudora, T/bird,
> Outlook or something else for email.

I used Agent as my newsreader for years. I never used it for e-mail, but
used Outlook instead.

About a year ago, I switched to Thunderbird for both. I didn't do that
because I wanted to use a single program, but because for both uses
Thunderbird had features I preferred.

As far as I'm concerned, all these programs are far from perfect. Each
one of them has some features I prefer to what its competitors offer. I
use Thunderbird (Betterbird, now) for both newsgroups and e-mail because
it comes closest to what I want.

Don't ask me for details of the differences. As usual, I won't remember
most of them. The only one I can remember is that Thunderbird let me
type and see special characters such as those in Russian, Chinese, etc.

On Sat, 25 Dec 2021 08:15:07 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
wrote:

>On 12/24/2021 9:27 PM, John wrote:
>
>> Years ago? Agent was a far better Usenet reader but a far poorer
>> email agent so many people used Agent for Usenet and Eudora, T/bird,
>> Outlook or something else for email.
>
>
>I used Agent as my newsreader for years. I never used it for e-mail, but
>used Outlook instead.

Well, I suppose *someone* had to. :)
>
>About a year ago, I switched to Thunderbird for both. I didn't do that
>because I wanted to use a single program, but because for both uses
>Thunderbird had features I preferred.

That's your choice. I don't like T'bird's Usenet functionality and
I'm used to Agent so ...

>
>As far as I'm concerned, all these programs are far from perfect. Each
>one of them has some features I prefer to what its competitors offer.

That is *so* true!

It's why I also use Irfanview, still.

> I
>use Thunderbird (Betterbird, now) for both newsgroups and e-mail because
>it comes closest to what I want.

And Agent does for me. See? We're not the same! :)

>
>Don't ask me for details of the differences. As usual, I won't remember
>most of them. The only one I can remember is that Thunderbird let me
>type and see special characters such as those in Russian, Chinese, etc.

Umm, Agent has access to those, too. Also Korean, Klingon and other
stuff. They need to be added in from the Forté website but that's
easily done.

I seem to remember that you'd need Agent 4.0 or later but that may be
a crossover memory for some other function.

Still, if T/B/Bird does it natively, that may be better.

Merry Christmas.

J.

On 12/25/2021 9:02 AM, John wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Dec 2021 08:15:07 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On 12/24/2021 9:27 PM, John wrote:
>>
>>> Years ago? Agent was a far better Usenet reader but a far poorer
>>> email agent so many people used Agent for Usenet and Eudora, T/bird,
>>> Outlook or something else for email.
>>
>>
>>I used Agent as my newsreader for years. I never used it for e-mail, but
>>used Outlook instead.
>
> Well, I suppose *someone* had to. :)
>
>>
>>About a year ago, I switched to Thunderbird for both. I didn't do that
>>because I wanted to use a single program, but because for both uses
>>Thunderbird had features I preferred.
>
> That's your choice. I don't like T'bird's Usenet functionality and
> I'm used to Agent so ...
>
>>
>>As far as I'm concerned, all these programs are far from perfect. Each
>>one of them has some features I prefer to what its competitors offer.
>
> That is *so* true!
>
> It's why I also use Irfanview, still.

I also use and like Irfanview.

But not for e-mail and newsgroups.

>> I
>>use Thunderbird (Betterbird, now) for both newsgroups and e-mail because
>>it comes closest to what I want.
>
> And Agent does for me. See? We're not the same! :)

No two people are.

>>Don't ask me for details of the differences. As usual, I won't remember
>>most of them. The only one I can remember is that Thunderbird let me
>>type and see special characters such as those in Russian, Chinese, etc.
>
> Umm, Agent has access to those, too. Also Korean, Klingon and other
> stuff. They need to be added in from the Forté website but that's
> easily done.
>
> I seem to remember that you'd need Agent 4.0 or later but that may be
> a crossover memory for some other function.
>
> Still, if T/B/Bird does it natively, that may be better.

I can't remember the details, but yes I thought it was better.

> Merry Christmas.

Same to you.