Uncreative Labs

Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 589 Location: Shandong, China

Where can I get it?

Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Posts: 594 Location: Western NC

Please, tell me you're not trying to make this a warez board....

Joined: 22 Oct 2005 Posts: 61 Location: sunny AZ

I just picked up a Productivity Pack for windows 3.0

Quite useless, but it has interesting art on the box. And it's still sealed, since it's useless.

oh, what were you guys talking about?

Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Posts: 377 Location: Stuttgart, Germany

I have heard of the Multi-Media Extensions but I have never heard of the Productivity Pack. What exactly is it?

Joined: 22 Oct 2005 Posts: 61 Location: sunny AZ

It seems to be similar to the old Microsoft "learning MS-DOS" package. Mostly tutorials...

Joined: 28 Feb 2006 Posts: 127 Location: LI, NY

...You know, my Win3.1 originally came with some sort of large "Tutorial" program when I first got it. If I remember correctly, there was Leonardo DaVinci and other famous people in it... Is this the same package?

Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:00 pm

That's the one, I still have my copy of it also.

Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 488 Location: pennsylvanai

I never heard of the " multi-media extensions" for windows 3.0
could it be not warez but an enhancement that microfort made available to fix deficiencies?

for example the add-ons for windows 3.1 like the "32 bit extensions"
and the service pack for the original 07/11/1995 windows 95
were given to users as a repair for problems that existed.
I don't think it is "warez" any more that any other "service pack"

Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:55 pm

Windows 3.0 with Multimedia Extensions is legit: http://toastytech.com/guis/win3mme.html

It's super-elusive, however, since it was available only for a very short time (apparently) only from OEMs.

Incidentally, there was a different "Multimedia Pack" for Windows 3.1x as well. This was a modest upgrade that included things like versions of Clock and Minesweeper with sound effects.

Joined: 28 Feb 2006 Posts: 127 Location: LI, NY

Interesting... though the only reason I ever used Windows 3.0 was b/c I could run it off an 8086 processor and 640k of ram (which Win 3.1 couldn't). If you had Win3.0 w/ MME does that basically give you a "mostly" Win 3.1 version of Win 3.0? (Including the fact it most likely won't run on an XT)

I think what I'm trying to say is, what was the point of Microsoft releasing this?

Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Posts: 377 Location: Stuttgart, Germany

I guess the same point they used to release MS Windows 95 Plus! and 98 Plus!. More themes, sounds, wallpapers and that sort of stuff. Today there isn't really a need for that anymore, but at the time of MME I doubt that there were huge wallpaper websites where you could download a wide variety of wallpapers. However, today you can get thousands of wallpapers off the internet for free or even make yor own wallpapers. The same goes for sound files.

Joined: 19 Oct 2004 Posts: 138 Location: Lynnwood,WA

I still wish I could find the Multi-Media extensions for Windows 3.0 for my 286/12 myself, that would be wicked cool. I'm sure I have plenty of RAM (Himem.sys rocks, 45K of the 4MB of extra RAM used, 630K of 640K base free! ) and shoot, I got a 1MB OAK RVGA graphics card in it now (need to find drivers for it eventually), and a SoundBlaster Vibra 16. Despite not having 386 Enhanced mode, many people who see me running it think it's at least a 386 SX, if not a DX given the performance.

Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:57 am

Anonymous Coward, I have Windows 3.0 with Multimedia extensions. Sorry to say, it is not going to do (running on an 8088) what you are probably hoping it will do.

I looked for it for several years before I found a copy. I got it hoping that it would give my V20 clone some kind of multimedia functionality. None of the extra multimedia functions would work on an 8088/V20 CPU. Sure, it installed a lot of extra icons with all these multimedia functions, but when I clicked on them, an error message would come up stating that these functions "needed to be run in standard mode".

Of course on an 8088/V20 that was impossible.

It did have a screen saver, which is pretty useless on an 8088, since you want all your CPU's power to go towards whatever app you are running.

It doesn't have true type fonts either, just fixed bitmap style fonts like Windows 3.0.

In other words, it was fun to play with on an 8088 to get my questions answered and my curiosity satisfied, that was all.

I've gone back to running Windows 3.0 (actually 3.00a) on my V20.

BTW, it was quite a pain to install and run it, since I believe it only came out on CD, never floppies. I have it in zipped file form, spanned across 4 floppies. (Plus, there is also another directory of multimedia files/sounds and the help file is separate as well, but they don't call it the help file in Win 3.0MM.)

I used a separate, freeware program that split the installation file (compressed to about 5 or 5-1/2 meg.using a DOS version of WinZip) into 4 chunks to fit on 3-1/2 inch 1.44 meg. floppies. To install it, I had to make a separate directory and name it something like "WINSETUP". I then copied the 4 zipped floppy disks to the directory, also including the freeware program to reassemble the files. I then went to the directory, ran the program which reassembled the 4 floppies into one big zipped file. THEN, I ran a DOS version of WinZip, which unzipped the mess and left me with a huge setup directory, 10 or 15 megs. I also had to copy the separate multimedia files which were on another floppy, and the help files as well; to the directory. Only then could I run winsetup.exe to start to install 3.0 MM.

It's been about 4 years ago, I had troubles with the setup not knowing where to find the help/multimedia sounds files. It was a real pain to get it installed, took hours and several re-attempts, I never did it again, which is why I can't remember all the exact details.

When it is installed, for some reason, it installs the "standard mode" control panel. If you click on it to change any control panel settings, nothing happens. You have to go into the Windows directory, there is another control panel file which is named slightly different. If you run that version of control panel, it will work if you are running an 8088/V20.

A fellow named Laurence Coombes wrote a big article about running Windows 3.0 on an 8088, contains a lot of useful information. Actually, he wrote two versions, the second one updated. suppose I can try and post it here as a separate topic.

He posted it back here on the UCL forum back in 2000/2001.

One or two people have it posted on the net, but they all have ver. 1.0, not ver 2.0.

If you have a 286, I would definitely not run Win 3.0MM on it, as Win 3.1 is much less buggy and has more functionality (uses true type fonts for example.) Win 3.1 needs a minimum of 256K of expanded memory and 640K of base memory, as well as a 286 CPU. This is met by almost all 286's, except perhaps for the original IBM 5170 (which only had 256/512K RAM) and the IBM 5162 (the XT 286). As long as you have at least 1 meg. of RAM in your 286, I would install 3.1 over 3.0.

Of course, it needs all the RAM you can throw at it, you can't go very far on 1 meg. of RAM!

And completely off topic, I have somewhere a complete box of the first version of Microsoft Office, which claims will run on a 286 under Windows 3.1!

Joined: 28 Feb 2006 Posts: 127 Location: LI, NY

xtguy wrote:

If you have a 286, I would definitely not run Win 3.0MM on it, as Win 3.1 is much less buggy and has more functionality (uses true type fonts for example.) Win 3.1 needs a minimum of 256K of expanded memory and 640K of base memory, as well as a 286 CPU. This is met by almost all 286's, except perhaps for the original IBM 5170 (which only had 256/512K RAM) and the IBM 5162 (the XT 286). As long as you have at least 1 meg. of RAM in your 286, I would install 3.1 over 3.0.

I just installed Windows 3.0 on my 286 thinking I would get better performance running compared to Windows 3.1. I have perhaps 2megs of RAM(?, I'm not home right now to check) I just thought with the slower processor 3.0 would run faster. Do you think it's unwise to stay with 3.0 compared to 3.1 (which I've had and used on my 486 since 1992)?

Office on a 286 in 3.1? lol, sounds neat!

Joined: 19 Oct 2004 Posts: 138 Location: Lynnwood,WA

Nuke wrote:

xtguy wrote:

If you have a 286, I would definitely not run Win 3.0MM on it, as Win 3.1 is much less buggy and has more functionality (uses true type fonts for example.) Win 3.1 needs a minimum of 256K of expanded memory and 640K of base memory, as well as a 286 CPU. This is met by almost all 286's, except perhaps for the original IBM 5170 (which only had 256/512K RAM) and the IBM 5162 (the XT 286). As long as you have at least 1 meg. of RAM in your 286, I would install 3.1 over 3.0.

I just installed Windows 3.0 on my 286 thinking I would get better performance running compared to Windows 3.1. I have perhaps 2megs of RAM(?, I'm not home right now to check) I just thought with the slower processor 3.0 would run faster. Do you think it's unwise to stay with 3.0 compared to 3.1 (which I've had and used on my 486 since 1992)?

Office on a 286 in 3.1? lol, sounds neat!

Naw, on any program, the slower the processor, the slower the program. The 286 lacks many things a 386 or higher computer has such as 386 enhanced mode, an internal L2 Cache, faster memory speed, and all that jazz. Now it would run faster on a 286 than a 286 would run Windows 3.1, however, I find the use of Windows on anything that old rather moot since the most availible programs are for MS-DOS. The only use I can see for having Windows 3.0 and lower on a machine is for some games/apps that would work that are still useful, and to show off just what this thing is really capable of.

3.1 does have a few added benifits, but most of those problems in Windows 3.0 are small fish as of now. When I first put my 486 together in 2001, I had Windows 3.0 on it, and aside from non-existant internet connectivity, I hardly ever had problems with it, and I got lots of things done for school in Windows 3.0. 3.1 was just the push over the edge I needed to have AOL at the time and be able to install a sound card.