> But on that time two things happens: - Windows 3.11 was released and spread like wildfire. No more limitations.
That is not what I recall.
First, given that pre-95 Windows ran on top of (MS-)DOS, it had no better capabilities, except that now a bunch of resources (e.g., RAM) was used to run a GUI. And it wasn't really "multi-tasking", again because it ran on DOS, and was more (co-operative) task-switching (like MacOS 9).
Further, Windows 3.11 was garbage with regards multitasking / task-switching compared to DESQview. I knew plenty of running multi-line BBSes with DESQview, but it would have been laughable to try that with Windows. I remember (perhaps incorrectly) running Windows under DESQview just fine.
Perhaps for 'normies' Windows 3.11 was good enough, and the GUI was helpful, but from a technical point of view saying "no more limitations" did not reflect reality.
Minor point: Windows ran on DOS up to Win98. If you shut down '95 or '98 you were actually at a DOS prompt, but with the screen set to black on black lettering. You could run the usual MS/DOS command to change the colours to something visible - sorry, can't remember the incantation at the moment, but it was nothing obscure.
That is not what I recall.
First, given that pre-95 Windows ran on top of (MS-)DOS, it had no better capabilities, except that now a bunch of resources (e.g., RAM) was used to run a GUI. And it wasn't really "multi-tasking", again because it ran on DOS, and was more (co-operative) task-switching (like MacOS 9).
Further, Windows 3.11 was garbage with regards multitasking / task-switching compared to DESQview. I knew plenty of running multi-line BBSes with DESQview, but it would have been laughable to try that with Windows. I remember (perhaps incorrectly) running Windows under DESQview just fine.
Perhaps for 'normies' Windows 3.11 was good enough, and the GUI was helpful, but from a technical point of view saying "no more limitations" did not reflect reality.