26

I was digging through my storage and came across this old copy of Windows 3.1. It's a strange looking version though and am wondering if anyone has any info on it.

The copyright page only mentions Microsoft Corporation but it doesn't look like any version of Windows or Microsoft product I have seen before. I did an image search and I cannot find anything that looks similar. The "W" logo doesn't appear to be a version of the Windows logo that I can find either. Perhaps it's from an alternate version of Earth? Who knows?

Anyone have any knowledge of this? I have a similar thread on Reddit and they referred me here so hoping y'all might be able to shed some light on it.

I would be very surprised if there was any value to it but I am open to giving it to someone if they wanted to preserve it for the ages.

The copyright page has no ISBN number. For the disks they are all identical except disk 1 with the instructions on how to run it.

Copyright page

Disks

Widows 3.1 Disks and Manual Cover

user3840170
  • 23,072
  • 4
  • 91
  • 150
Zenboy
  • 261
  • 3
  • 4
  • 11
    That’s an OEM version of Windows, there might be a mention of the manufacturer in the manual (or on the back cover). Do you know which computer it came with? – Stephen Kitt Jan 04 '22 at 05:54
  • 1
    Thanks for the response. The back cover is blank except for the W logo same as on the front. Took a quick look on the Copyright page and TOC but they all mention Compac, HP, IBM and several others. Not really narrowing it down :(

    So nothing unusual or special about this version from point of view? Would it be worth donating to some sort of Software Preservation Society if such a thing exists?

     – Zenboy Jan 04 '22 at 06:01
  • 1
    Have you tried imaging the floppy disks and comparing file contents to other known copies? Say, those from (*looks around nervously*) WinWorldPC? Or installing it in an emulator and taking some screenshots? That might give us some idea if it’s anything rare. – user3840170 Jan 04 '22 at 08:05
  • I do not have the means to make an image. I don't think I've had a PC that can take a floppy in close to a decade and a half. I would have to rely on the good graces of the community to volunteer their system and brain power to do such a thing. Any takers? It might be good fun just to see, but I'm not very well equipped technologically or familiar enough with this version of Windows to know what's what. Is it really worth it? – Zenboy Jan 04 '22 at 08:58
  • 2
    Does the manual have an ISBN number ? – Alan B Jan 04 '22 at 09:20
  • Whether it’s worth it is debatable ;-). However you do seem to have an unusual version — English-language versions of Windows 3.1 I’m aware of come on six disks, eight disks (with Central European language support) or twelve disks (with Japanese support), not seven. This wiki page has a list of volunteers who would be willing to image your disks for you; I could take care of it too but unless you’re based in France that’s not going to be useful. – Stephen Kitt Jan 04 '22 at 09:22
  • ‘Can someone take this in’ is hardly the best fit for our Q&A format, though we had some questions like it (https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/q/9411/, https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/q/12038/, https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/q/16785/). Might have made a good topic for the chatroom, but I don’t think unregistered users can join. If the question is ‘what version is this’, there is little anyone can say without reading the disks. – user3840170 Jan 04 '22 at 09:37
  • 2
    If you’d be willing to image them yourself, a sector image made with a cheapo USB floppy drive should be enough, no need to go for anything fancy and expensive like Kryoflux. – user3840170 Jan 04 '22 at 09:44
  • I have nothing to base this on, but I think you'd ultimately find out that those were provided by a "white box" OEM (such as those located in the phone-book sized "Computer Shopper" magazines). Some of these businesses grew pretty sizable while the enthusiast market was building up. – sonnik Jan 04 '22 at 21:02
  • 2
    @Zenboy - what country? That could, I suppose, affect what Microsoft does or did. – dave Jan 04 '22 at 23:31
  • 1
    Can you take and upload a full picture of the copyright page? I see on the reddit post that someone suggested checking the copyright, but in looking around, it seems like this guide may of been somewhat generic, and this company may have simply reproduced it. In which case, there may be a license indicating their permission to reproduce, and to which company said license has been granted. – MirrorImage Jan 05 '22 at 00:04
  • In addition to @MirrorImage request for copyright page, can you also please post clearer shot of the disk label(s)? – A C Jan 05 '22 at 01:34
  • Will add more photos as soon as I can. – Zenboy Jan 05 '22 at 05:41
  • Being curious, I searched for images of "Windows 3.1 OEM floppy" and got some results from archive.org (e.g. Chicony, Dell, Packard Bell). While this doesn't really help in getting the answer, maybe it can be a nice addition to the digital archive? (though, probably after successfully identified...) – Andrew T. Jan 05 '22 at 06:33
  • 1
    The logo rings a bell (I'm in the UK BTW, in case it was a small manufacturer) as @sonnik suggests. A reverse image search doesn't help even after squaring up and enhancing the photo. Also I'm not sure it's actually a "W" – Chris H Jan 05 '22 at 09:31
  • 2
    I have also seen this logo in the 90's (in northern Europe) but cannot remember what it is. It could be a "W" or a up-trending curve. – simon Jan 05 '22 at 12:02
  • To me, the logo looks more like a 3D-extruded F rotated 45° clockwise, except that there’s no space between the two horizontal strokes. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jan 06 '22 at 14:17
  • Could it be the logo for a different product? My first version of Windows was bundled with Word For Windows. – Mark Ransom Jan 06 '22 at 22:05

2 Answers2

21

It was usual for OEMs to provide their own disk labels. My Windows For Workgroups disks say "DELL", rather simply, no fancy logo.

No Microsoft Windows flag, either. Didn't that only come in with Windows 95?

WfWg disk

Thus I'm pretty sure the "W" is merely the logo of the company the disks came from, rather than indicating some sub-variant of Windows.

dave
  • 35,301
  • 3
  • 80
  • 160
  • 6
    https://i.pinimg.com/736x/0d/94/89/0d94895a08dff7848384129e9e8ae9a8--splash-screen-it.jpg – user3840170 Jan 04 '22 at 13:54
  • @user3840170 - I stand corrected. WfWg was the only 16-bit Windows I ever used, and that only briefly. – dave Jan 04 '22 at 14:59
  • But is it also normal for the OEM to print their own custom manual? OP's manual has the same logo as the disks. – JBentley Jan 04 '22 at 20:40
  • @JBentley - I don't know the answer to that. My own WfWG manual is not Dell-ified; it's got something like "for sale only with a new PC" on it, so I assume it's Microsoft-printed for OEM use. – dave Jan 04 '22 at 23:28
  • 6
    I'm surprised it's a:/setup and not a:\setup. – gerrit Jan 05 '22 at 08:27
  • Hah, yeah. I wonder if that actually works, though I doubt it (It's a little-known fact that forward slashes work just as well in the NT file systems, as long as you can get past the application code and maybe some Windows APIs) – dave Jan 05 '22 at 12:13
  • @gerrit Didn't some early PCs lack the \ character on the keyboard? – Darrel Hoffman Jan 05 '22 at 14:19
  • @JBentley it was very common for OEMs to provide manuals with their own covers at least. – Stephen Kitt Jan 06 '22 at 11:09
  • DOS has always supported both / and \ for directories. The first version of DOS didn't have directories and used / for the flag character; when DOS 2.0 came about, Microsoft wanted to use / for directories to match UNIX, but settled on \ to avoid having to change the flag character. But in cases where it's not interpreted as a flag, / will work, and you used to be able to change the flag character to - at runtime even. – mystery Jan 06 '22 at 13:23
  • @Andrea true, but in this case it won’t work — at a COMMAND.COM prompt, a:/setup.exe only changes to drive A:, it doesn’t run setup.exe. – Stephen Kitt Jan 06 '22 at 14:29
  • @Andrea I don't have the URL handy but, according to someone from Microsoft (might have been Raymond Chen, might have been someone else), it traces back to the IBM-provided utilities for the first version of PC-DOS using / as the flag character and Microsoft choosing to maintain consistency with them in the commands they provided. – ssokolow Jan 07 '22 at 06:22
  • The '/option' format is a long-time DEC convention. Gates and Allen would have been familiar with it from their use of a PDP-10 at Harvard. – dave Jan 07 '22 at 13:12
  • I have a set of 3.1 floppies that also lack logos like that. Probably also an OEM copy. – jamie Sep 28 '22 at 01:33
12

It looks like the base install of 3.1, which came on seven diskettes. 3.1 can be differentiated from 3.11, because 3.10 uses SZDD compression (the first four characters of a compressed file), while 3.11 uses KWAJ.

The W appears to be a manufacturer's device, but the dots on the right-hand side are the sort of thing one sees in Windows flag-logos of that era.

wendy.krieger
  • 712
  • 3
  • 6
  • 1
    My copies of Windows 3.1 (in Microsoft-branded boxes) come on six 3.5” disks. Are you sure the “base install” came on seven? (And yes, I am talking about 3.1, with SZDD compression.) – Stephen Kitt Jan 04 '22 at 10:36
  • 1
    I got my copy on the day it was released. There were OEM versions with five and six disks, but the thing in the box had seven. – wendy.krieger Jan 04 '22 at 11:08
  • Thanks for the responses all. Much appreciated. Sounds like it might be of some interest for the right person. I don't have the tools or inclination to do anything with it but I feel bad about throwing it away. Anyone willing to pay the shipping let me know and I can send it your way. Something to think about. – Zenboy Jan 05 '22 at 04:50
  • 3
    @StephenKitt Windows 3.1, Disk 7 is labelled "Disk 7 - Additional Printer Drivers" and a typical install process won't request that it be inserted. – ssokolow Jan 05 '22 at 06:40
  • @ssokolow good to know, but it’s surprising that none of my boxes have it (I got them shrink-wrapped). – Stephen Kitt Jan 06 '22 at 11:04