Happy Birthday Windows

Windows 1.0, the original 16-bit operating system, was released on 20 November 1985 and today marks its 23rd Birthday.

55 programmers developed the system in a year, making the 1st edition a break from the norm in terms of usability. It enabled users to use a mouse to navigate the system and use its various functions and applications that were included.

Applications included were a set of desktop applications (MS-DOS File Management Program), a calendar, card file, notepad, calculator, clock and telecommunications programs allowing users to manage their day-to-day activites much like a PDA does today. It also allowed users to switch between programs without needing to quit and restart them.

The OS itself had 256 colours ability, re sizable windows, a reserved area of minimized programs (the original concept of the task bar) and the ability to customize the appearance of windows. Microsoft began to include what we now call a "Control Panel" in its first version of Windows (1.x). It came with a lot of interface controls that are still seen in versions of Windows today such as text boxes, radio buttons, scrolling bars and menu items.

In the interface of Windows 1.0, windows can be maximized, minimized or tiled. The active windows cannot be overlapped instead of tiled. There is no option to cascade windows, so it is inconvenient to show more windows at the same time.

Microsoft announced the idea of windows in spring 1983. But the first version of Windows, Windows 1.0 was not released until November 1985. Windows 1.x is based on MS-DOS 2.0. Due to the hardware and software limitations of MS-DOS 2.0, it was not successful compared to later versions of Windows such as Windows 3.1. However, Microsoft did have a good chance to market the operating system at fast
developing IBM compatible computers. Speaking of marketing, Microsoft's screaming CEO, Steve Ballmer, got behind a camera and recorded a hilarious advert for Windows 1.0. Shouting on the video, Ballmer gets excited about Windows Write, Windows Paint, Notepad and a clock feature! Thankfully even Paint has been updated these days with the introduction of the ribbon user interface in Windows 7. Checkout Ballmer's advert below. Also worthy of a special mention is Rafael Rivera, the author of Within Windows. Rafael is famous for creating UX theme patches for Vista and XP and recently unlocked the superbar in Windows 7. Rafael was born on the exact same day as Windows 1.0 was released. Happy Birthday Rafael & Windows!

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Gmail offers new Inbox themes

Next Story

MiniHex v1.2.0.5 release

46 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Windows 1.0, the original 16-bit operating system, was released on 20 November 1985 and today marks its 23rd Birthday.

Windows 1.0 was not an Operating System. If it were, it would not have required DOS to handle all the file operations and hardware driver management. The first version of Windows that was considered its own OS was Windows 95. Also, DOS was 16-bit before Windows came out.

Shadrack said,
Windows 1.0 was not an Operating System. If it were, it would not have required DOS to handle all the file operations and hardware driver management. The first version of Windows that was considered its own OS was Windows 95. Also, DOS was 16-bit before Windows came out.

True, true. At the 1.0 - 3.11 phase, windows was little more than a GUI shell on top of DOS.

Happy birthday Windows!
I'm using the M3 build of Windows 7, and yeah, it's great. Still has a few bugs to work out, but it's really nice... I can't wait for the final version to come out! (Or at least the beta...)

ManOfMystery said,
Haha Steve Balmer is a nut! He does NOT act like a CEO lol.


You mean like a smug *******? Hummmm...

Also worthy of a special mention is Rafael Rivera, the author of Within Windows. Rafael is famous for creating UX theme patches for Vista and XP and recently unlocked the superbar in Windows 7. Rafael was born on the exact same day as Windows 1.0 was released. Happy Birthday Rafael & Windows!

What a crazy coincidence. :laugh:

Happy birthdays!

I've purchased Windows since the 3.11 days (preinstalled on my first "IBM compatible" machine I ever bought). Bought 95, 98, 98SE, ME, NT4 and even XP for myself, and Vista now on new computers for the family.

That's a lot of revisions, but I have never personally seen Windows 1 or 2 series, other than screenshots on various shots.

markjensen said,
I've purchased Windows since the 3.11 days (preinstalled on my first "IBM compatible" machine I ever bought). Bought 95, 98, 98SE, ME, NT4 and even XP for myself, and Vista now on new computers for the family.

That's a lot of revisions, but I have never personally seen Windows 1 or 2 series, other than screenshots on various shots.

I still have them. They were just TSR applications with a hotkey to switch back to them.

Happy birthday to windows. I wish him that his next version gets much better than the rest of them. And senceraly, there is a looot of place for that.

Damn it's sad that guy's barely changed attitudes or looks in 25 years LOL

now if only they align pricing of windows 7 with that video and you'll cut windows piracy i'd say almost over 50%

I thought the pricing for Windows remained the same throughout, after adjusting for inflation?

Though arguably you get a heck of a lot more these days with your dollars than back then, with Paint and Reversi included "at no extra charge." Now it would be Media Player, DVD Maker, entire Live suite, web browser, Paint, Wordpad, Chess, Mahjong Titans... etc, etc. :P

Or we can take it a step further and throw OSS software into the mix. Lots of features for no charge.

Much of Windows 1.0 still resides in Vista. LOL, 20 years of cruft. If only they could make a version that removes the cruft and yet still keeps compatibility (as I realise they need this for business users).

Sacha said,
Much of Windows 1.0 still resides in Vista. LOL, 20 years of cruft. If only they could make a version that removes the cruft and yet still keeps compatibility (as I realise they need this for business users).

such as

Much of Windows 1.0 resides in Vista? More like none. Vista is based on the NT family of Windows, not the DOS/9x line.

You mean legacy code. I've been saying for the past 3 years that Windows needs a complete re-write, something like what happened from OS 9 - OS X. Run legacy apps in an emulator for a while, institute a worldwide transition program, etc. It'll break compatibility for the most part, but it'll be a completely new paradigm form which MS can move forward.

Windows is a victim of its own popularity. It's the banana-boat of operating systems. People using old versions of software, demanding that even the newest version of Windows be able to run them, is what's holding it back.

Given this situation, however, Windows is handling it surprisingly well. And Windows 7 seems to be a step in the right direction with respect to optimizations.

LTD said,
You mean legacy code. I've been saying for the past 3 years that Windows needs a complete re-write, something like what happened from OS 9 - OS X. Run legacy apps in an emulator for a while, institute a worldwide transition program, etc. It'll break compatibility for the most part, but it'll be a completely new paradigm form which MS can move forward.

Windows is a victim of its own popularity. It's the banana-boat of operating systems. People using old versions of software, demanding that even the newest version of Windows be able to run them, is what's holding it back.

Given this situation, however, Windows is handling it surprisingly well. And Windows 7 seems to be a step in the right direction with respect to optimizations.

Not everyone will jump ship with this transition, it'll take more money and resources MS could chew on (it could be possible though). The reason Apple's Intel transition was successful was due to their small market share and availability of applications(basically pro stuff, and all those companies were ready to transition to begin with). If you look at Windows 7 there really wouldn't be a need to rewrite the entire OS from scratch. They've done something beyond and excelling of what others companies that couldn't go through such in development strategies.

Honestly when you compare Windows and Mac which one is easier to manage? The Mac of course because of the hardware that's tied to it. Microsoft has excelled as a software pioneer to have the success rate of working machines that are various in each of their ways and to work as well as they do.


LTD said,
You mean legacy code. I've been saying for the past 3 years that Windows needs a complete re-write, something like what happened from OS 9 - OS X. Run legacy apps in an emulator for a while, institute a worldwide transition program, etc. It'll break compatibility for the most part, but it'll be a completely new paradigm form which MS can move forward.

Windows is a victim of its own popularity. It's the banana-boat of operating systems. People using old versions of software, demanding that even the newest version of Windows be able to run them, is what's holding it back.

Given this situation, however, Windows is handling it surprisingly well. And Windows 7 seems to be a step in the right direction with respect to optimizations.

Funny how all the unoptimized legacy code that is "weighing" windows down still results in games that run fast (faster than Mac OS X in most cases, but I have only compared with OSX86 installs not "true" Apple expensive-ware).

Sacha said
Much of Windows 1.0 still resides in Vista. LOL, 20 years of cruft. If only they could make a version that removes the cruft and yet still keeps compatibility (as I realise they need this for business users).


Oh, so you've sifted through all of Vista's Source-Code to come to this conclusion?

As TRC put it, Vista is based on the NT kernel where Windows 1->ME were all based on DOS.

How you made the News staff when you make such stupid, misinformed claims like this is beyond me.

Shadrack said,

Funny how all the unoptimized legacy code that is "weighing" windows down still results in games that run fast (faster than Mac OS X in most cases, but I have only compared with OSX86 installs not "true" Apple expensive-ware).

Your games run fast because you've got hardware that is powerful enough to handle an OS that is a resource hog. That's what old code and legacyware do to an OS.

LTD said,
You mean legacy code. I've been saying for the past 3 years that Windows needs a complete re-write, something like what happened from OS 9 - OS X. Run legacy apps in an emulator for a while, institute a worldwide transition program, etc. It'll break compatibility for the most part, but it'll be a completely new paradigm form which MS can move forward.

Windows is a victim of its own popularity. It's the banana-boat of operating systems. People using old versions of software, demanding that even the newest version of Windows be able to run them, is what's holding it back.

Given this situation, however, Windows is handling it surprisingly well. And Windows 7 seems to be a step in the right direction with respect to optimizations.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_on_Windows
something like that?

XerXis said,

To be fair, Apple's solution was not a brilliant success; rather, it was a controlled failure. But it had to go the virtualization route, given the monumental dissimilarity between OS 9 and X. OS X was a complete departure. It broke everything that came before.

Athernar said,
Oh, so you've sifted through all of Vista's Source-Code to come to this conclusion?

As TRC put it, Vista is based on the NT kernel where Windows 1->ME were all based on DOS.

How you made the News staff when you make such stupid, misinformed claims like this is beyond me.



/told

Sure, they changed the kernel (which was pretty much a complete rewrite). While I say 'much' of the Windows 1.x code, this is taking that there wasn't much of Windows 1.x to start with (small code base). I do believe they dumped Windows 1.x code in there for backwards compatibility as there was a problem with Windows NT API being too different at first. They obviously didn't rewrite this.

Windows 1.01 was basically just a fancy file manager for DOS, I doubt there was any of it left even in Windows 3.1 (you can't run Windows 1.0 programs in 3.1 for example). Now there might be a few leftovers from 3.1 in Vista as part of the NTVDM, maybe even an icon here and there, but as for Windows 1.01 I think it's safe to say there's no chance.