Installing Windows NT 3.51 + NewShell on The $5 Windows 98 PC!

[@ERGLupin]

It’s crazy how just implementing the UI of Win95 on top of 3.51 all of a sudden makes it feel sooo much more modern. Especially considering that the underpinnings of NT have always been vastly more modern than 95/98/ME even at 3.51 but aesthetics really alter perception.

[@Lofote]

Yeah, funny enough, the next design update came first to NT back then with Win2000 and then WinME copying the design changes - here it was the right order ;)

[@russellhamner4898]

I remember when this first came out (albeit I was just a nerdy teenager who hadn't yet entered the workforce) and it was THE FUTURE. I think it was expensive too but I can't remember. Of course a $200 pair of speakers cost what felt like a million bucks to me when I was 13.

[@EssenceofPureFlavor]

@not c0metdn NT isn't OS/2 and never has been.

[@THB192]

​@not c0metdn Because NT was a workstation operating system gunning for the professional market. It wasn't made with running legacy Windows apps in mind, nor was it designed for home use. It was designed to be a robust system suitable for servers and workstations. In short, it was made primarily to kill Unix.

[@Wolverine607]

Yes so very true. Microsoft made a big mistake making Windows 95/98/ME. They should have made consumer Windows NT. Windows NT was so superior to anything 9X. 9X held the PC industry back for years to come with its horrible inefficient multi tasking and threading and legacy DOS code base. They should have released this to consumers then instead of WIN95 back then in May 1995. Though it really is all water under the bridge for a long while now and really was since 2006-2008. Though back in 2002-2005 and even 2006 the 98SE holdouts allowed MS and the software devs to continue and support 98/ME way too long which did hurt performance back then having to support 2 completely different platforms. Really when MS released XP in 2001, they should have done an Apple and tried to kill 98/ME ASAP even if it required offering a free upgrade. Sadly that did not happen until like 2006 which was too long to be supporting 2 completely different platforms. But its all water under the bridge now and has been for nearly 15 years.

[@ronkemperful]

Great Video that brings fond memories of the good old days of the 90's! One note from an old 4.0 NT support person: Windows NT cannot be directly installed to a pre-formatted NTFS file system partition - all versions of NT until Windows 2000 had to accommodate older BIOS limitations for motherboards at the time which typically restricted hard drive sizes to 2 GB for older hardware and 8.4 GB for newer hardware. So, by default any version of Windows NT has to be installed FIRST on a FAT 16 file system partition that only can be sized up to 2 GB in size (because of the mathematical limitations of FAT 16). Then, after NT is installed, the user then can convert the file system to the more modern NTFS file system which then can be extended to any size needed since it isn't limited by the computer BIOS.

[@daoutbox9884]

Ntcovet

[@Wii505]

It's surprising that no one suggested what I'm going to about to suggest. And that is to use the IBM WorkPlace Shell on Windows NT 3.51.

[@Wii505]

@ITANIUMXL The source code for the IBM WorkPlace Shell is publicly out there. So someone could patch it to work with Windows NT 3.51.

[@NijiDash]

Nice! Notice the inactive title bar color at 11:53, before the NewShell was installed. Now notice the difference at 17:24, after NewShell has been removed. It seems like the application forgot to change the default inactive title bar color upon removal.

[@adamsfusion]

12:57 - I'm sure if you tried any mailbox at Microsoft you'd get a "This mailbox does not exist". It's common in SMTP security to consistently respond in one way or another, either the mailbox exists or it doesn't for given values. This is known as "greylisting" and prevents spammers from trying to scrape identities.

[@WindowsOnWindows]

Didn't know about New Shell - fascinating!

[@BilisNegra]

What a piece of cake of an episode. Again, I'm thankful there's people like you to kind of make it through the day these awful times.

Enjoying my breakfast and this happens, the content I like. ⚡️

[@coffeedvdrw]

i smell floppy drive

[@ssf1389]

@@coffeedvdrw b

[@loudone0]

Same, I'm eating Reese's puffs

[@OzzFan1000]

Just a little explanation about the partitioning process... early versions of Windows NT supported a non-DOS compatible FAT16 filesystem using unsigned integers to get to a total of 4GB, which is where the 4GB boot partition limitation comes from. During the setup process, it creates the 4GB FAT partition and, as you saw, it then converts it to NTFS. I think it wasn't until Windows 2000 that directly supported partitioning drives as NTFS and removing the boot partition limitation.

[@boneske]

I had to learn the hard way that the NT version of FAT16 wasn't compatible with booting DOS based OSes greater than 2GB. I was trying to run Windows 98, NT4, 2000 and XP on 1 partition(as a proof of concept). I was only able to boot 98/NT4/2000 before I ran out of disc space to install Windows XP.. If you format the hard drive with the NT version, you can run NT4, 2000 and XP but Windows 9X won't be able to boot.

[@judgewest2000]

Only ever seen a few machines running Windows NT 3.51. Remember thinking it was so special being able to have long file names and could run Office 97 on it. Just felt special for some reason.

[@procta2343]

I only ever saw the server version at school, it had windows 95 clients at the time.

[@psychoticgiraffe]

On a side note, I actually became obsessed with windows 98 after seeing some of your videos and made the opposite of your $5 system, more like an absurdly expensive 1999 build that I ended up upgrading substantially to get to run the full 90s-2006 range of windows 98 titles including far cry and halo, using a vintage Inwin case from 1995, good to see more love for NT though, its not an ideal gaming platform but I imagine it would be great for some server hosting.

[@judgewest2000]

Windows NT ran on its own with no DOS mode. I recall thinking that was so cool and so 'official' somehow. Almost like Windows had grown up

[@notthatntg]

That's what I like about NT: you don't have to install DOS first.

[@blankpage9277]

I enjoy these videos. The format is quite cozy and I learn something. Good sound and music choices and narration. 👍

[@MichaelMJD]

I appreciate it!

[@mvShooting]

NewShell more like Windows NT 4.0 Transformation Pack, lol.

[@kokodin5895]

and it would change again if you install internet explorer 4.0 (but not 5.0 or 5.5)

[@BusinessMudkip]

Nt 4.0 is boneless 95

[@BusinessMudkip]

I’m not to happy that I posted that sorry for the cringe

[@li_tsz_fung]

@@BusinessMudkip But I actually want to know why you think 95 is better. When I was very young, I use Windows ME at home and use NT 4.0 in school. I thought NT was newer than ME because the login screen looks cool. (And I never saw BSOD in NT4.0)

[@mvShooting]

@@BusinessMudkip I don't think they can be compared too much besides the UI. 95 was DOS-based, so many things work differently than in NT. Since NT was business-oriented, it had bad DirectX and multimedia support. However, the NT kernel was much more stable and solid than DOS. Windows 95 would BSOD if you removed a floppy or a CD before it finished reading/writing, for example. That was enough to cause system instability.

[@robertoXCX]

I just wanted to let you know that I'm basically doing a FULL reset of everything on my Windows 7 machine, and your video on NTLite is the very first place I looked to. Thanks for everything you post!

[@MichaelMJD]

You’re welcome! Glad the video helped

[@drygnfyre]

If you're curious, you can do the slightly thicker borders on any version of Windows that has the 9x UI. Change the padding to 3 (default is 1). That was the same default padding used on the 3x releases, which is likely why NewShell kept it in place. Increasing the padding also makes the "active window border" color show up.

[@psychoticgiraffe]

Nice to see NT getting some use, waiting on the IBM PowerPC 4 socket windows NT build tho

[@raymondcorrea1]

Man I remember how popular gateway pcs were back in the day. I remember when I used to get the old catalogs and dream of owning one of those power pcs back in the 90s

[@balocava]

Such an under rated channel! loving the $5 dollar Windows 98 PC series. keep it up!

[@mirelmoisa3918]

Nice:) Video ideea: Try setting up an printer on the 5 dollar pc

[@MichaelMJD]

That would be a fun project for sure! Just have to find one first haha

[@peytonlutz1]

@@MichaelMJD No it has to be a scanner! Just like Bill Gates with his Windows 98 P&P demo. Also, 20+ year old Inkjet printers are a bad idea imo.

[@sin10lp4]

Hi! Your Videos are the BEST on the world! I love that you're explaining everything so nice 👍

[@MichaelMJD]

Thank you!

[@CocoaEm]

@@MichaelMJD I agree, best videos.

[@sonic2000gr]

Back in 95 I was an avid user of NT 3.51. Had 486Dx4 with 32 (!) MB of RAM and NT would fly on it. I liked the stability and security much better than Windows 95. When new shell came out as a preview I started downloading it (via dial-up!) and it took me a couple of tries overnight to get it.

[@paburo-san6667]

too sad that system didn't have enough compatibility with drivers and videogames :(

[@procta2343]

@@paburo-san6667 yeah it seems to be a bit of a forgotten OS after NT4 came out, try to get drivers for some of the stuff is practically non existent, compared to windows 3.11 and NT4. When i have ran 3.51, i only have the drivers for the network card which is a 3 com one, anything else is a no no, even the printer i have hasn't got a driver for it either. MSDOS and 3.x but no NT3 driver at all. Mind saying that, it sees my graphics card as an S3, and tries to give it a driver, which wont work with the card sadly.

[@Thales_WH]

@@procta2343 You have to be more careful when choosing hardware. There are fewer of them, but there are enough of them, it's not impossible. Rather, a lot of those controllers were lost to time. The problem arises when I want something above standard. for example, a graphics card that provides high resolution, sharp images and at the same time a high refresh rate (necessary for large CRTs). It is not a problem to get such a card for AGP, NT3.51 supports AGP I think from SP3, but if we install it on a machine that only has PCI, then our choice is very narrow. Sound, LAN or SCSI is not a problem. The S3 card had drivers for NT3.51 on their site for a very long time. I have enough of them stashed away. Unfortunately, S3 cards do not have high refresh rates without an external DAC. Realtek also has drivers for NT3.51. Old HP printers also work.

[@SupaPhly0]

to make things easier installing different OS's all the time, you could get a scsi sd adapter so you can swap drives quickly

[@RBMK1500]

that would bust his 5$ budget..

[@slashtiger1]

Me: **watching video** - 10 seconds later - MJD: "We'll also be looking at NewShell" Me, thinking: "Wh--! Well, just how the $CENSORED$ did you manage to get your hands on this in this day and age?!" I knew this existed, yet I'd never seen it with my own eyes. I absolutely loved the heck out of Windows NT, and have used all versions right up to Windows NT 5 (which was a beta of Windows 2000). I love how you manage to show the most obscure software from Microsoft and others to us like you've had it in your personal archives since before you were born... Been watching your vids forever, but _MAN,_ am I hitting that subscribe button now!

[@MichaelMJD]

That is so great to hear! I’m glad you liked this video. I love taking a look at old and obscure software on this channel so you can definitely expect more videos like this. Thanks for subscribing!

[@slashtiger1]

@@MichaelMJD You're welcome. Like I said, I'd been watching your videos _forever,_ so I thought I'd set this straight and give you a flat-out subscription. Keep up the good work!

[@jeromebressoud]

Actual NewShell @ 10:39 Did not know about this Shell preview, thanks

[@airfixer9461]

Great video, I love NT3.xx....great NewShell demo...prepared us for NT 4.0 in those days.. :-)

[@lorrewatkins5925]

Just wanted to say, thanks so much for these great vid's back in time look, and that we can really appreciate how technology was, and its roots to what we have today ! So keep up these awesome vids and thanks again !

[@Lofote]

It had to report V4.0 (if a program asked it via DLL calls it also gets 4.0), as Microsoft said "to check if you are running the new shell thats coming with Win95, the easiest thing is to check if the version is at least 4.0. Thats why they internally changed it.

[@OhNotThat]

"we can put clock down here by the other clock" ah that brings back good memories from windows nt 4 which also had the useless clock.exe baked into it, leaving millions of windows users puzzled.

[@TulgaD5]

Now a handful of questions I had all these years about Windows NT, 95 and 2000 were answered. It's amazing, how on the same OS a UI change makes it look 90 % similar to what we use today. Except the start menu, which has similar features, I could make Windows 10 look like exactly this. From then to today it's only the start menu, taskbar groups and text, and mainly color that chagned. Everything else feels about the same.

[@tziuriky86]

LOL I've messed around with my work Win 10 Enterprise laptop (I'm IT admin) to make it look like Windows 98 - icons, wallpaper and all (I could install this neat App called Classic Shell to also change the Start Menu...). You have to see the confused faces whenever people see me using it 😂😂

[@DoktorLorenz]

I loved NT4 Workstation, i never tried 3.51 though

[@procta2343]

Not many people seem to play with it, for some reason. But i suspect its down to driver support for it. I have played with the server part, and did the same stuff with it, like i did with windows NT4 server, Deploying windows 95 over the network, and had a go at the remote boot of MSDOS. So me to me, i think microsoft did the same trick, with what they did with windows 2000 to XP. XP was based on the windows 2000 plate form, but with a few upgrades and a facelift.

[@askhowiknow5527]

Windows NT 3.51 should've been longer lived. It's a really nice release

[@procta2343]

stable too, i ran the server version on a pentium 3 dual processor, with 4 gig of ram. It ran for fun, Booted up like it was on acid!

[@daoutbox9884]

A busy time during development of windows where 3.51 fell to the side being a business os. And fresh interest in win95/98 for home so most new apps ignored NT at the time. When I loaded 3.1 NT I sensed right away how superior to just old 3.1 was.

[@JeffreyJibson]

Don't forget 3.5.1 was a minor release. The upgrade from 3.5 to 3.5.1 was less than $10 if I remember correctly, perfect for a struggling college student. This would be more on par with service packs when internet access became available.

[@boneske]

Glad to see you took my suggestion and turned it into a video. Wish you would have credited me in the video though.

[@SkyeWeeb]

Didn't I suggest this a while back? Nice seeing my idea come to light :p

[@kryskarr23]

You’re a national treasure Michael MJD

[@ceebee23]

we actually ran NT3.51 with Newshell at work for about 12 months before NT4.x was released. Seems so radical after Win3 GUI.

[@kacpreusz9911]

Try to take the dvd drive apart and clean the Lens, this might help

[@therealjammit]

I used to work on a place that repaired and upgraded computers. We had issues with CD rom drives of those types. We found out if we stored the CD roms upside down they would work longer. I actually had two of those drives. I would mount one in my computer and used it until it went bad. I would then swap it out with the second drive. I stored the first drive upside down on a shelf until the replacement drive went bad. Swap out. Store upside down. Repeat.

[@austinleong3319]

@@therealjammit lol, you reminded me of how a friend of mine fixed my PS2 disc read error by turning the console upside down and banging the thing a few times. Still works to this day!

[@notthatntg]

That will do even more damage. *NOTHING* can touch the lens; otherwise, you have a broken player.

[@gwgux]

That reminds me of a shell replacement for Windows 3.1 I found after Win95 came out (started with a C, can't remember the name of it). It does only make sense that Microsoft would do something like this for NT considering the direction they were going at the time.

[@DavidWonn]

You’re thinking of Calmira. I like that it has the option to be the shell replacement or it can be manually launched from Program Manager with equal functionality either way.

[@gwgux]

@@DavidWonn Thanks! Not remembering was bugging me!

[@JE-wd4lu]

I actually came across this a couple of months ago when I was browsing another website where you can download various operating systems. It probably will not work, but would have been nice to install this on Windows 3.1. I'm familiar with Calmira II, but this update definitely integrates the Windows 95 shell much better.

[@daoutbox9884]

Winfiles

[@GlobalBeam]

It would be interesting to see what happened if the internet explorer 4 with shell extensions would be installed on newshell.

[@blainepalmerza]

I Enjoy your content so much, Michael!

[@MichaelMJD]

That’s awesome to hear!

[@Aeduo]

The difference in sizing is just related to the appearance settings. I think the window border size determines that spacing you're talking about.

[@laz7354]

I loved NT 4.0 but wish it's been as stable and bulletproof as 3.5x. This is very cool ...a proto Windows NT 4.0 without the user/machine driver/kernel space screwups of NT 4.0!?!

[@JeffreyJibson]

I only had 3.5.1 crash twice. First, when the system partition ran out of space. Second, with a head crash.

[@thatoneuser5066]

Actually that first portion of the Setup is the same in Windows 3.0-3.11 as well

[@b3ans4eva]

There’s an excellent book written about the Windows NT development by G Pascal Zachary called Showstopper! A quick Google search should reward you with the PDF.

[@hgbugalou]

You should do an episode that shows files and/or API calls that have remained unchanged the longest in Windows.

[@drygnfyre]

Being able to lock the taskbar was added in Windows ME, IIRC. It was a relatively late addition to the Windows Explorer UI.

[@wc2006]

It was actually added in Windows XP.

[@CrazySpruiker2001]

​@@wc2006It was actually introduced in Neptune build 5111, and then Whistler build 2211 after Neptune was cancelled.

[@jameschamplin1742]

Taskbar locking didn't show up until Windows XP. Maybe Windows Me. Pretty darn sure it was XP. Just that minor little thing, aside from that, I love this. I run NT 3.51 both in PCem and on an old AMD 486DX4-100 and it's really a great release. My love will always be for NT 4, 98, and 2000 though. But NT 3.51 is great, as the "Ultimate Windows 3.1!"

[@WndSks]

No, taskbar locking was added in Win98/IE4 shell update.

[@NicoDiamante]

Try install windows xp mode in windows 10 with VMLite?

[@wrotedog]

I remember this system on my 2nd navy ship in 1995 like it was yesterday.

[@BBplayz]

Hey dude im a huge fan im so sorry you only have 117k subs

[@sbeehre]

This was really impressive back in the day and the only reason i didn't use it full time was NT was crap at games! it was so stable compared to Win 9x

[@procta2343]

I wonder if this was released as a sort of cheap upgrade to get users ready for the new interface. Or to update the older systems to the new interface, that cannot run NT4.

[@steeviebops]

The partitioning in NT, pre-2000, was always odd. The reason you got the error about the partition being too large is that the setup cannot create a new NTFS partition. If you choose NTFS during setup, it first formats the partition in FAT16 and then converts it later, as you saw. But there's two problems with this. FAT16 is limited to 4GB volumes in NT (using 64k clusters - 9x doesn't support this so is limited to 2GB), so you can't create a partition larger than this during setup. Secondly, the conversion process often has alignment problems and the end result is a 512 byte cluster size rather than the usual 4k, which can be quite slow.

[@PhirePhlame]

Since the Shell Preview's for assistance in developing programs to be compatible with an upcoming GUI, the fake version number could be in the service of letting the devs go ahead and use that version string as the discriminator to determine which UI it's displaying its window in.

[@msdosm4nfred]

You need to install OS/2 Warp 4 on this rig!

[@Humaid09]

he had already installed it in a previous video

[@msdosm4nfred]

@@Humaid09 oops. mkay

[@Bort_86]

I wonder if it is possible to do it the other way around and replace the shell from a newer NT version with the one from NT 3.5x... I remember fiddling around as a kid with windows xp to do so but I never was succesful :d

[@SamsonSilvo]

I know there existed at least one 3rd party shell replacement for Windows 3.1 that basically recreated the 95 UI complete with the start menu. I didn't know Microsoft essentially released an *official* one! (Albeit only for the NT version of 3.x.)

[@SoulcatcherLucario]

that's calmira! he did a video on that too

[@SamsonSilvo]

@@SoulcatcherLucario I forgot what the name of that shell was! Thanks for reminding me!

[@drygnfyre]

There were quite a few shell replacements available for 3.1. Norton Desktop was another popular choice. I remember something like LiteStep being available for Windows XP.

[@coffeedvdrw]

this KZbinr is good because he does'nt use VMware

[@RWL2012]

does that mean he was bad when he did...?

[@GconduitYTubeAccount]

I remember NT 3.51 being rock solid until Internet Explorer 5. Was forced to move on to NT 4 where drivers and updates broke things.

[@procta2343]

when i studied Windows XP, my MCP lecture said about NT4, was every thing you did system change with it, you had to re run the service pack through it. So all the files etc were update, with the service pack setup. Not sure if it was the case when adding new hardware to the system. But every time i play with it, i put on service pack 3 or 4, Do the driver installs etc then lock it all off with service pack 6. Yeah i think Internet Explorer in general was trouble in itself. The last few versions were very buggy and unstable i found. The last one with windows 8 was very bad for memory leaks.

[@RustedCroaker]

I recall it differently. Before NT 4 came out, most manufacturers don't even bother to write drivers for NT. It was a real pain in the ass to build a computer with all the peripherals compatible with NT before that.

[@dollardealtech768]

Nice video. Also, will you do Windows Longhorn next?

[@DavidWonn]

When newshell is added, does Control-Shift-Escape act like Alt-Minus or Alt-Space, as it does in regular NT 3.51, or does it fire up the Task Manager, as it does in NT 4.0?

[@goodboy02network90]

Can you do a history of Windows NT development?

[@procta2343]

id love to see this too! I know windows 3.1 / 3.5 NT can be tricky to run on none Pentium systems at the time

[@Lofote]

You can be safe that 16 days before Win95 launch all development was done as back in the day you needed to calculate some time to produce the CDs and ship them out to the shops ;)

[@WR3ND]

I wonder if NewShell could work for Windows for Workgroups 3.11. I'm guessing probably not, but would be cool though. Cheers.

[@drygnfyre]

No, this was exclusive to NT 3.51. WfW was DOS-based.

[@WndSks]

Win3.11 had a similar update called Win32S that added support for 32 bit programs. It was still version 3 internally and very few 32 bit programs support it. This was basically Wine for 16 bit Windows.

[@Lofote]

Oh and yes, NEWSHELL needed to say Windows version 4.0, even thought it was still 3.51 kernel. The reason: Microsoft forsaw, that programmers would check for the Windows version number to be 4 or higher to decide whether the start menu etc. is there. (Actually a bad choice, because even in NT4, 95 etc. you could still continue to run PROGMAN as the shell, but usually nobody did it, so...) But thats the reason why NEWSHELL increased the Windows version number to 4.0

[@Thales_WH]

A long time ago I installed the second version of this shell. The result was that a number of applications stopped working, both 32bit for NT3.51 and 16bit. Unfortunately, I don't remember which ones they were.

[@shadowopsairman1583]

Most don't know but you can boot from cd in Windows 98, i presume it can be said for 3.1/3.5/3.51(NT), 95, NT4.0. Just make the cd boot priorityin the bios, save, restart, and hit any key.

[@CathrineMacNiel]

Mhm no. You were able to boot directly from the Windows 98 cd because it had a boot record. All previous versions did not and came with boot disks instead.

[@JanuszKrysztofiak]

The "El Torito" extension that made bootable CDs possible was finalized in 1995, then it took some time for BIOS vendors to adopt it.

[@bradleychardenet9453]

I just got one of these gateways in a lot of old tech ok fb marketplace. It’s the 400 model but I believe the 400 and 450 are very similar or almost the same

[@kofteburger]

Reminds me of Windows Desktop Update for Windows 95.

[@DavidWonn]

I’m curious if newshell works on a 386, since NT4 requires at least a 486 to install. Unfortunately my 386 is down and didn’t have enough RAM to experiment, though I do happily run NT 3.51 on a 486 and a Pentium.

[@Dave4000]

I wonder if the DVD drive has some sort of power saving that's making it power off, making the computer "forget" about it? Can the DVD drive firmware settings be altered to prevent that? Try updating the firmware on that DVD drive.

[@szabotihamer]

If there's a firmware update for that specific drive out there I would try updating it. Probably that was never done with that drive and it might fix the issue.

[@pelgervampireduck]

I wonder if that thing can be made to run on win 3.1. there was a program manager replacement called "calmira" that implemented 9x GUI on 3.1. this is like an official version of that.

[@ages2001]

Michael MJD in next video install AmigaOS or Windows NT 5.0 Beta 1 on $5 Windows 98 PC.

[@ryaxnb2]

Nt 5 beta 1 is a great idea. So is amithlon

[@daoutbox9884]

I remember installation on Pentium 75 board then install full version complaint CPU not support?

[@CathrineMacNiel]

AmigaOS required an entirely different architecture, so not going to happen.

[@RWL2012]

Nice one! Windows 95 next...?

[@VectraQS]

I personally managed to install NT 3.51 on my 386. 20 MHz, 8 MB. Official minimum requirements are 25 MHz and _16MB_ . I doubt it'd like to run NewShell though. Interestingly, NT 3.51 can correctly authenticate to a modern Windows NT share on 10 or 7, unlike even Windows Me.

[@DavidWonn]

Cloning the usual boot option and appending MAXMEM=6 in the boot.ini can force NT 3.51 to only see and use 6MB (at least on my 486SX25.) You can gradually lower it to settings like 5.5 though you reach a point where you can log in while Program Manager doesn’t initiate. Go lower, and eventually it just blue screens.

[@daoutbox9884]

That was used to overcome bad ram just like resize the HDD to overcome bad sectors.

[@kokodin5895]

one more thing try installing internet expolorer 4.0 because it contain windows 98 explorer preview version

[@NaviciaAbbot]

I know Dave Plummer has spoken a few times on NT 3.5 Shell Update before.

[@sporktek]

The read errors you're seeing on these installs are associated with bad ram. I'd recommend running memtest86 on this machine.

[@danielkawano206]

Michael, do you have a monochrome video adapter and CRT? I am very curious to see If this would work with such setup since, to the best of my knowledge, VGA was always required to run taskbar-based Microsoft OSs. Thanks!

[@volvo09]

Newshell is cool, like the "SE" update to win95 that introduced active desktop and made the experience a lot closer to what 98 was by integrating Internet explorer into the desktop experience. When i was younger i had my first win3.1 pc and found a taskbar shareware for it. It felt like a new machine after, haha. I think it was called Winbar? There were a few others too.

[@titaniumex2556]

when is there going to be winbar for windows XP

[@MishraArtificer]

I actually started having that problem with my old IDE DVD-RW drives before I upgraded to a new desktop...I wonder if they have an internal sleep function, separate from the OS controls.

[@МистерПомидорныйДжо]

There's an earlier revision of NewShell bundled with some sort of a NT 3.5 post-RTM build, but I was unable to get that one to work. Try to find info about that, if you want the earliest version.

[@beedslolkuntus2070]

Put some background ambience in this video, like a light fan running or so. Like druaga1 s older video. I like to hear those while seeing someone install old OSes and what not hah

[@jourphoria1204]

Wish I Had 5$ Windows 98 PC It’s So Cool

[@richardgallagher9795]

@MichaelMJD What is the link for the version of Newshell that you downloaded, i have a couple versions of it but none that send the old nt files into a backup folders like the one you have & i neeeed that

[@janluofficial]

Now that you ran the command to uninstall newshell twice, how about running the command to uninstall NT 3.51 aswell?

[@jvacxp1069]

Hey MJD I have a challenge for you, can you run a Older Windows beta version than run vmware or any virtual program on that windows beta version and than run a newer windows os like 7 or 8 or maybe 10

[@kokodin5895]

Funny thing is about your cdrom read error i also had this on my pentium 3 slot1 computer in the past, and it is not related to cdrom drive at all in my case it was ram problem it was running ok in windows xp and 2000 after indtallation but was stucking with corupted files during first blue windows setup stage. i don't remember how i solved it but i remember it was exactly that and not other hardware problem

[@luiscintron6723]

Old version of windows:exists Some 5$ win98 pc:bye bye buster

[@leonjones7120]

When i was in uni, a tutor tried installation of OS/2 on floppies. I am not sure exactly how many floppies it took, but it took ages. The last floppy disk damaged the installation!

[@procta2343]

OS/2 i found wouldn't take to my pentium 3 systems, so i recon its very fussy on what it likes to go on.

[@JeffreyJibson]

I think 38 plus driver disks for os/2 warp 3

[@AmaroqStarwind]

I want the Program Manager ported to modern Windows.

[@mrtiff99]

8:02 what the hell is that about? Why does it need to know that? Great video BTW

[@CathrineMacNiel]

during the installation, setup tried to find COM executables to add to program manager, and as those dos programs had no real names it asked the user instead to select one from a list of possible names.

[@Billblom]

IBM demanded that OS2 run on the 286 based AT computer. The problem: There was no instruction to switch from kernel mode to user mode. That instruction first appears in the 386. MS insisted that they needed to make the 386 the target for OS/2... IBM was not amused. They had promised OS2 to the AT business customers all over the country. The only solution found was a triple fault, which would "reset" the processor.. which would look at the dispatch table in ram and restart in user mode. I don't remember the amount of time (in terms of clock ticks) that were required. I do remember it was a bunch of microseconds. Perhaps a Millisecond or two? At any rate, when that has to happen almost constinuously, that is a BAD thing. IBM took over coding on OS2. Guess what? Warp required a 386... Meanwhile, NT started off at Day one requir9ing a 386 or 486 at that time, and handled the flips between kernel and user mode. Now, the 286 still had a major issue. TCP/IP owned the internet... but the stack was rather large. No "smart" ethernet cards.. So when you loaded up TCP/IP on the OS2, you were looking at a miniscule amount of ram to use after the operating system loaded.. The 16 meg limit for the AT was a monster shortcoming...So, to use OS2 and run "big" programs, you needed to eliminate TCP/IP. And Netbeui and IPX were horribly "chatty" protocols that did tons of broadcasts... So Netbeui was about it, and made the OS2 less than useful until Warp appeared. (I sold a lot of Warp, which was very reliable and worked very well in the CAD world...)

[@kacpreusz9911]

Try to patch it so that it can run XP software

[@arduinoguru7233]

No way I even struggled with Windows 2000 patches it was never be 100% compatible no matter what I do .

[@kacpreusz9911]

@@arduinoguru7233 Exactly.

[@arduinoguru7233]

​@@kacpreusz9911 ironically I can run any ancient windows application even in old Linux distro but I can't do the opposite .

[@Lofote]

Office 97 actually ran on Windows NT 3.51. It looked really strange, but it worked ;)

[@leonkernan]

I never really got to do much with 3.51, by the time I had a computer that coud handle it ok I'd gotten my hands on 4.0

[@hanro50]

Wonder if this will run on modern windows

[@RadioParanormaliumPL]

Would it be successful if you tried to install NewShell on a DOS-based Wind 3.x? And how about trying to launch this thing under Windows 10?

[@mibnsharpals]

no the Newshell needs windows NT. Its a plain 32Bit programm

[@DavidWonn]

Calmira exists as a Win95/98/XP shell for Windows 3.1x with a fully functional start menu, taskbar, etc. Some have even used it on NT 3.1.

[@dominic0305]

4:46 On the original NT 3.1, it didn't actually give that warning, but instead the format would just fail. Didn't know they added the warning later. I'm also pretty sure you can't go above 2gb, at least in 3.1, because it always formats the partition as FAT and converts it to NTFS later in setup. Not sure why it does it that way.

[@progamer3000-uz7pj]

Would be nice to try and Install this under dos based windows

[@drygnfyre]

That wouldn't work. NEWSHELL was exclusive to NT-based Windows, specifically NT 3.51. The consumer equivalent was just 3.1 from 1992.