So much so in fact, Microsoft developed NT 3.1 first on non-x86 architectures (i860 and MIPS), then later ported to x86, to ensure no x86 specific code made it in.
NT supported quite a few architectures:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT#Supported_platforms
"Windows NT 3.1 was released for Intel x86 PC compatible and PC-98 platforms, and for DEC Alpha and ARC-compliant MIPS platforms. Windows NT 3.51 added support for the PowerPC processor in 1995"...
NT is a pretty interesting bit of PC history, I can highly recommend the book "Show Stopper!" by G. Pascal Zachary that recounts its development, and also dives a bit into why making the OS portable across CPU architectures was so important to the team at the time.
Well, it is true, but Windows did run BE on the original MIPS R3000 platform. And only on the R3K[0]. The CPU architecture flag is still defined on modern Windows as IMAGE_FILE_MACHINE_R3000BE. There's an early test build of Win3.1 + GDI somewhere that runs on this platform.
The actual first release of WinNT 3.1 only supported MIPS R4000 and higher, I think. In little endian mode.
[0] I know the Xbox used a modified NT kernel, I've seen claims that the Xbox 360 also was, which would make it the second NT system to run big endian. Not familiar enough with sources better than wikipedia to trust that it actually was.
Fun times.
(Also, was the x86 emulation implemented in-house? I wouldn’t be surprised if some niche small company had a x86 emulator for PPC product that they could be paid to port.)
When OS/2 for PowerPC was set in motion, that Intel would “Make CISC Great Again” with the Pentium was far from clear.
Pentium shook that tree a bit, and Pentium II really razzle-dazzled it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workplace_OS
The 1990s were quite a time for personal and workstation computing.
tiahura•4h ago
twoodfin•3h ago
bombcar•3h ago
Windows 95 ate the world because the world was mainly still DOS; look at the numbers. It wasn't people upgrading from Win 3.1.
esseph•1h ago
BLKNSLVR•1h ago
linguae•30m ago
Synaesthesia•53m ago
hey squandered their early lead in the US among consumers and education and also ignored the international market.
Not gonna lie Wintel was a formidable force. Microsoft was ruthless in cornering the market.
But technically, OS/2 and MacOS gave Windows a run for it's money, arguably superior on some respects, and you could say the same for PowerPC and Intel.