Talk:Windows NT 3.1

Windows NT 3.1 received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Microsoft High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft 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.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Windows: Computing Top‑importance

	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.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Software: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled[edit]

There was talk about Intergraph support. If you get "Computer Graphics Magazine" from the announcement time, there is a paragraph there about planned support that was dropped. I may edit this later with an actual quotation.

hardware?[edit]

This article (and others in the series) should document the minimum hardware specs to run the systems described. JulesH 17:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

N-Ten[edit]

As the "NT" in Windows NT has commonly been recgnized as "New Technology," that section seems like a fraud, perhaps vandalism. Still, seeing as the area makes references to the references below, a rollback might be needed, instead of simple deletion. Krayt 08:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further reading, the references corolate, my mistake. Krayt 09:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Server[edit]

Why did the NT 3.1 range have an Advanced Server, but no Server? Was it originally planned, then scrapped? 203.5.217.3 05:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing the name Advanced Server was just an odd naming choice and doesn't mean it's equivalant to what's later called Advanced Server.

It was probably for marketting purposes. Windows NT has always been a direct competitor to Unix operating systems. Declaring Windows NT as being an "Advanced" Server might initially seem more attractive, as silly as it might sound. --Mike 08:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IE[edit]

"Microsoft offered Internet Explorer starting with IE2, and released up to Internet Explorer 5.0 for Windows NT 3.x."

The components get installed but IE5 doesnt actually run.... NT 3.x cant use IEs above IE(3 i think?) fully, because the 16 bit versions dont work, and the later 32 bit versions rely on the windows 95 type explorer shell to work properly. and yes, this has actually been tried and is documenteds. see http://www.hpcfactor.com/support/patching/winnt351/

"* Although you may not actively use Microsoft Internet Explorer, installing it updates system components and security."

The 16 bit versions do work. Don't install the dialer (NT has its own.) NT 3.1 can't run above IE 3, but NT 3.5 can run up to IE 5.Malx (talk) 03:01, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article review[edit]

The article gives the illusion that it benefits from a wide array of reputable sources. However, on closer examination it is noted that there are two primary work used throughout the article (Zachary and Custer). Additionally the article relies heavily on primary research. I would recommend finding more neutral and a wider variety of sources. This, among other changes, will contribute towards improving the article. EagerToddler39 (talk) 05:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

News Protocol[edit]

The latest stable version date in the infobox uses this page as a reference. Is anyone able to check that? Is anyone able to archive that somewhere that can be accessed over HTTP? Zell Faze (talk) 13:59, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ᴡindows® ɴᴛ 3.2 as first member of the ɴᴛ family ?[edit]

I just found a runnable version of ᴡindows® ɴᴛ 3.2 on qemu with (ᴄ) 1990‑1991 Microsoft Corp in winver.exe. 2A02:8420:508D:CC00:56E6:FCFF:FEDB:2BBA (talk) 10:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

32-bit operating system[edit]

The article states that "Windows NT 3.1 is a 32-bit operating system developed by Microsoft.", but Windows NT 3.1 is also available for DECs 64-bit Alpha. Did it run in 32-bit mode on Alpha? 77.10.243.91 (talk) 17:26, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. There was an internal build for AXP64 before Itanium which is documented on Raymond Chen's blog, but it was not released. Itanium was the first public 64 bit release. Malx (talk) 02:55, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Windows NT 3.1. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.winhistory.de/more/nt31.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:16, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Showstopper - Zachary[edit]

The book Showstopper was published in 1994, yet the article references state 2009. Was this a 2nd or later edition of the book, or is it OK to correct the references? John a s (talk) 18:00, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]