Endless Paradigm

Assassinator Wrote: [ -> ]Windows 3.1 is the best.  Runs on 8MB of RAM and easier to use than any modern Windows.

Windows 3.1 was just an interface to DOS for n00bs.
May as well just use DOS.

Super Hero Solar-kun Wrote: [ -> ]

Assassinator Wrote: [ -> ]Windows 3.1 is the best.  Runs on 8MB of RAM and easier to use than any modern Windows.

Windows 3.1 was just an interface to DOS for n00bs.
May as well just use DOS.

I doubt either of them would be able to handle the source engine seeing as the lack of opengl or directx...


Plus DOS doesn't even have much multitasking support, which would make it difficult to do multiple things at once. 3.1 may be better capable of doing some more complex tasks.

trademark91 Wrote: [ -> ]I doubt either of them would be able to handle the source engine seeing as the lack of opengl or directx...

That's what porting is for!

trademark91 Wrote: [ -> ]Plus DOS doesn't even have much multitasking support, which would make it difficult to do multiple things at once. 3.1 may be better capable of doing some more complex tasks.

Did Win3.1 multitask?  I don't really remember opening more than one application on Win3.1, and do remember that it does 'disable' some lower level windows, though that could be just older computers not having the power to multitask rather than the OS itself.

Not entirely sure on that one, i just remember using the windows command line and getting really pissed at the lack of the & and the && command.