On August 24, 2025, Microsoft’s Windows 95 operating system will celebrate its 30th anniversary, a milestone that evokes a wave of nostalgia among tech enthusiasts. Windows Central, a prominent voice in the tech community, frequently revisits the legacy of this groundbreaking OS, highlighting its iconic features such as the Start menu and taskbar. As Microsoft shifts its focus towards Windows 11, the enduring presence of Windows 95 elements in its older sibling, Windows 10, raises intriguing questions about the evolution of user interfaces.
One such question has recently been addressed by veteran Microsoft Engineer Raymond Chen, who has played a significant role in the development of Windows over the past three decades. He shed light on why the setup process for Windows 95 was predominantly text-based, despite the capabilities of MS-DOS to support graphics.
Why was Microsoft’s Windows 95 setup text-based?
Windows 95’s setup experience starkly contrasts with the visually rich installations of its successors. Chen explained that while MS-DOS could technically handle graphics, the implementation was fraught with challenges. He noted, “Yes, MS-DOS could do graphics, in the sense that it didn’t actively prevent you from doing graphics. You were still responsible for everything yourself, though.” The limitations of graphics support at the time meant that any graphical setup would require intricate programming and optimization.
Chen elaborated on the primitive nature of MS-DOS graphics, stating that the only available method was a slow BIOS call to plot individual pixels. This made the prospect of a graphical setup daunting, as performance would suffer without direct access to the frame buffer. The complexity escalated further when considering the need for a graphics library capable of rendering more than just simple pixels.
Fortunately, Windows 95 had a minimum VGA video card requirement, which simplified some aspects of the installation process. However, the intricacies of managing planar modes—essential for effective graphics rendering—remained a significant hurdle. Chen humorously noted the presence of a team of experts in VGA planar modes nearby, highlighting the collaborative nature of software development at Microsoft.
Beyond the mere display of graphics, the setup program necessitated the creation of dialog boxes, which in turn required a window manager and keyboard support for user interaction. Chen pointed out that accommodating non-alphabetic languages, such as Japanese, added another layer of complexity, necessitating collaboration with teams across different time zones.
Moreover, the inclusion of animations would have demanded a scheduler to manage events based on hardware timers, further complicating the setup process. The challenge was exacerbated by the limited storage capacity of 640KB, which would require innovative solutions to maximize available space.
Interestingly, Microsoft already had a similar product in the form of Windows 3.1, which was fully equipped with the necessary components for a graphical setup. This raises the question of whether the effort to create a new installation process for Windows 95 was ultimately justified, given the existing capabilities of its predecessor.
