Talk:Windows 2.0

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Microsoft Windows / Computing  (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Configuration question[edit]

Someone in the know: Did INI files, specifically SYSTEM.INI and WIN.INI, exist and matter in the pre 3.x world of Windows? If so, did sysedit.exe exist at that time? Much appreciated, MrZaiustalk 22:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

WIN.INI existed for Windows 2.xx and served all the functions that were split between WIN.INI and SYSTEM.INI for Win 3.

SYSEDIT.EXE did not ship with Win 2. I don't know if a version of the Multipad sample program with default loading of system files was offered for free download back then. SYSEDIT was a modified version of multipad. 22:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC) krebiz


How much was this at retail? PureLegend 19:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Windows 2.x[edit]

Shouldn't this article either be named Windows 2.x or be split into seperate Windows 2.0 and Windows 2.1x articles? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 17:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

Release date[edit]

Released on 1987-11-23, Windows 2.0 allowed for windows to overlap each other, in contrast to Windows 1.0, which could only display tiled windows (this limitation was imposed due to lawsuits from Apple Computer;

I remember walking into a Computerland in Canada in the Summer of 1987 (July) and seeing Aldus PageMaker running Windows 2.0. So I doubt the date of November 1987 as the release date, unless they were just Beta testing it. --Jimj wpg 04:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Screen shot?[edit]

There used to be a screen shot in this article. Where did it go? All the other Windows versions DO have screenshots! --Krawunsel (talk) 19:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It was deleted for having no fair use rationale. - Josh (talk | contribs) 21:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


I'm looking for informations about this programm. I can't start this article, because I don't know enough about this programm. (Pz-engl (talk) 15:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC))

Windows 2.01[edit]

This article is rather broken as it completely omits Windows/386 2.01, released in September 1987. See for press release and for box- and screenshots. Windows 2.03 was not the first release of Windows 2.x. Codegen86 (talk) 13:54, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Techie stuff[edit]

Trying to find the version of MSDOS required to run Windows 2. I believe it was MSDOS 3.3 or PCDOS 4. Rem the DRDOS lawsuit re DOS warning, reason was incomplete emulation of "HIMEM.SYS" in DRDOS a requirement rectified in Windows 2 release. Win2 requirements I believe were 512MB RAM, but 1MB could be used on XT/286 and 8086 CPUs (LIMS was a hardware EMS standard so not really a Windows issue). Timeline definitely need review in this article. I'd like to see a note re DesQview and Xenix, cometed with Windows. I remember at cascaded Windows in 1985 but may have been beta. Reason for query is that DOS XMS driver put 286/386 into protected mode to access memory above 1MB. I believe that Win2 was also first to use 286/386 Invalid Instruction exception (Patent by Microsoft to execute 'instruction' at "Copyright IBM" part of BIOS ROM) to switch between Real and Protected Modes (ring 0 and ring 3 security levels on 386). Prior art was to reset the system via keyboard microcontroller (a slow process). IOW, Windows 2 did not run on DOS anymore than running 'LOADLIN' from DOS means Linux is a DOS program. Shjacks45 (talk) 14:22, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyright or patent[edit]

Copyrights and patents are very different things. Was the fight about patents or copyrights? Probably patents (but not impossible it was about copyright or both). As written, there seems to be no distinction between patent and copyright. Also, if you win 10 patent claims, you're probably doing pretty good---in most cases, you only need to win on one and it's not atypical to file suit over lots of claims but only expect to prevail on a few. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:34, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Ambiguous line in paragraph about legal battle with Apple[edit]

" The judge ruled in favor of Hewlett-Packard and Microsoft in all but ten of the 189 patents that Apple sued for. The exclusive ten could not be copyrighted, as ruled by the judge."

If the judge sided with Apple for the remaining ten patents, how did the judge also say that Apple could not copyright those ten? (talk) 23:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation says this: "the court decided that 179 of these elements had been licensed to Microsoft in the Windows 1.0 agreement and most of the remaining 10 elements were not copyrightable—either they were unoriginal to Apple, or they were the only possible way of expressing a particular idea." - Josh (talk | contribs) 14:03, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


From where did this codename came from? What is the proof over it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:05, 5 September 2016 (UTC)