back to article First ever 64-bit version of Windows rediscovered … and a C compiler for it too

A 64-bit test build of Windows 2000 Professional for the DEC Alpha processor has been rediscovered – shortly after the discovery of a C compiler that could generate binaries for it. Earlier this month, intrepid code archaeologists rediscovered a C compiler, based on DEC's C compiler for Alpha from the 1990s, that could …

  1. 9Rune5

    Windows ME

    The Reg FOSS desk cynically suspects that the Windows 2000 moniker was intentionally chosen for its similarity to the unloved DOS-based Windows Millennium Edition so that customers would confuse them and buy the product aimed at lower-end systems

    First of all, I believe few people called it "Millennium Edition". It was colloquially known as "Windows ME".

    Windows 2000 started out as Windows NT 5. When "Windows 2000" was announced, some debate arose in the beta forum groups. At the time the message was that "Windows NT" had a whiff of incompatibility surrounding it. The marketeers believed "Windows 2000" would underline the improved compatibility with legacy Windows. Possibly also drawing on the attention lavished on the Year 2000 bug.

    Either way, pushing Windows NT 4 at the time was met with much resistance. Many developers advocated that they had to develop on the same platform as their victims. Once convinced, Windows NT was quite an eye opener for many of them. I suspect many of the same developers subsequently then had to be worked on to convince them of the splendors of 64-bit Windows. It was a bizarre time to be alive.

    Windows 2000, and to a greater extent Windows XP, underlined the sunsetting of legacy Windows.

    1. wolfetone Silver badge

      Re: Windows ME

      I only ever called it Millennium Edition, but that's because I'm a stickler for the branding I saw.

      1. AMBxx Silver badge

        Re: Windows ME

        Windows Meh

        1. Jedit Silver badge
          Headmaster

          Re: Windows ME

          ME was fine as a moniker. As someone pointed out at the time, it was the second time in a row that the two-letter suffix on a version of Windows had been the common acronymic name for a nasty medical condition - in this case, myalgic encephalitis. (XP is xeroderma pigmentosum, a genetic disorder that causes hypersensitivity to UV light and is speculated to be part of the origin of the vampire myth.)

          1. Liam Proven (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

            Re: Windows ME

            [Author here]

            Second in a row? After what?

            XP was a couple of years *after* ME.

            1. Jedit Silver badge
              Facepalm

              Re: Windows ME

              Please pardon my apparent descent into senility. It was still two in a row, but I forgot that XP was an island in the middle of the sea of shit Windows releases rather than the point where solid releases stopped.

              1. Psion1k
                Devil

                Re: Windows ME

                The prominent versions of Windows at the time were Windows Compact Edition, Windows Millennium Edition, and Windows NT.

                It was a common joke that the next Windows edition was to be a combination of the three (which is sort of true for Win2k), though the moniker given was not so great:

                - Windows Compact Edition (CE) + Windows Millennium Edition (ME) + Windows NT (NT) = Windows CEMENT

                https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/2utm7b/windows_cement/

                1. Francis Boyle Silver badge

                  You really need

                  the image of the concrete block for the joke to be funny.

      2. WereWoof

        Re: Windows ME

        Some people called it Millstone Edition.

    2. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

      Re: Windows ME

      In Germany called "Müll Edition" -> translates to "Trash Edition".

      1. A.P. Veening Silver badge

        Re: Windows ME

        In Germany called "Müll Edition" -> translates to "Trash Edition".

        Somehow that works very well with the German reputation of never making jokes.

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. Trigun

      Re: Windows ME

      Ahh but did you called it Windows ME as in the letters M and E, or Windows ME as in referring to yourself (i.e it was ME wot dun it)?

      I think the official name was the latter, but everyone I know (including me) called it the former.

    4. John Riddoch

      Re: Windows ME

      About that time, Sun sold Solaris 2.6. At the last minute, before the release of Solaris 2.7, the next release was rebranded to "Solaris 7"; at the time it was assumed this was so it would have a higher version number than Windows NT 5 as was due to come out soon, then MS rebranded to "Windows 2000" leapfrogging Sun's version numbers by a margin. This was back in the days the two companies had a fairly solid rivalry going on, so it didn't seem that implausible they were fighting over version numbers...

      So, not only was Sun's rebranding not worth the effort, it cause a bunch of problems in early releases of Solaris 7 because not all the developers had got the memo in time and some parts still mentioned "2.7" and generated issues in odd ways.

      1. Down not across

        Re: Windows ME

        Solaris is still really just version 5.

        $ uname -sr

        SunOS 5.11

    5. MacroRodent
      Windows

      Re: Windows ME

      I have a Windows ME installed in a VirtualBox (why? masochism maybe). Took some doing because first one had to install MS-DOS 6.2 and the CD-ROM driver hassle into the VM before the distribution CD would work. Jogged bad memories...

      One fun thing to check with it is what web sites still work with the bundled IE: Almost none. The main killer for most sites is the ancient ssl in ME, and the fact most sites insist on using https and modern protocols.

      1. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

        Re: Windows ME

        Use a local proxy. Squid is best known, and works under any OS. Including Windows.

        1. MacroRodent

          Re: Windows ME

          If I for some weird reason were forced to use Windows ME as other that a curiosity cabinet item, I would probably try to find the last Firefox (or other browser) version that still worked on it. Of course that might still not be enough to get https working, we would probably be talking at least 10 year old browsers.

          1. katrinab Silver badge
            Windows

            Re: Windows ME

            There is a version of Kmeleon (stripped down version of Firefox) that works with modern SSL in Windows 98 and presumably ME. There you will find that modern JavaScript mostly doesn’t work.

  2. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

    I loved the DEC Alpha workstations for their speed.

    I'm not surprised there was a port made of 64 bit Win2k, as the people creating NT were poached from DEC.

    Of course, an initial "port" doesn't make it a product, so MS wasn't lying about that.

    1. Steve Graham

      ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

      Primarily Dave Cutler. We had the VMS source code and he had written most of it.

      1. Version 1.0 Silver badge

        Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

        Dave just moved from DEC to Microsoft after DEC was heading to the end of DEC's life, he had always worked to create highly reliable and functional operating systems. OK, I'm using Windows today but I still have an RL02 that can install RSX11M - Windows has been "upgraded" a lot since it was created but the original versions were great to use, and so was RSX.

        DEC was dying, not poached.

        1. StargateSg7

          Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

          Dave Cutler was poached because Ken Olsen CEO of DEC cancelled the PRISM project which was a superworkstation system that would have outclassed any PC or higher end pro-level desktop computer available in the late 1980's / early 1992. Bill Gates PERSONALLY INTERVENED to ensure that nearly the entire DEC PRISM team was brought over to Washington State from Massachusetts. I remember running a LOT of DEC Alpha chip workstations in Calgary at the time and they were SUPERB! Lots of number crunching ability and scalable to parallel supercomputing if you knew the right engineers to make custom motherboards (Which we did!) for Oil and Gas Reservoir modeling and simulations.

          Hooking up four DEC ALPHA 64-bit CPUs on one custom-built motherboard and racking them 20 high saved us from buying tens to hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Cray, IBM and NEC supercomputers! Our four-way DEC ALPHA mobos were made locally in Calgary and were custom-made for specific companies! There should STILL be a few of those Mobos around in some Western Canada corporate archives or back-closet storage hideaways!

          Since Cutler wrote most of VAX VMS Microsoft wanted his expertise in supervising a super-project-team to code a PRO-LEVEL OS that was truly multi-platform, multi-tasking and multi-user capable that went BEYOND IBM's OS/2 workhorse operating system for PC's! It would become Windows NT and when that was done in 1992, he was tasked to head the entire NT-based Cairo (aka future basis for Windows 2000/XP) development project after Microsoft Research Fellow Raymond Chen desired to focus more on the WinFS Object Oriented File System that was to be eventually embedded into Cairo. Cairo and WinFS were both cancelled in favour of Windows 2000 and XP as the byproducts of those research projects!

          Now You Know!

          V

          1. kennethrc

            Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

            Maybe you'd know, then? I'd heard the name for the "Cairo" codename came from "XP"; "chi rho".

            1. Fred Goldstein

              Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

              Cairo began long before XP. It was one of those classic vaporware projects, lots of rumors about what it would do, maybe in two years or so... and that was in the 1990s. After the whole thing ended, Windows XP came out, and that name was sometimes thought of as chi ro, not because it was Cairo but sort of as a tribute to the discontinued Cairo project.

              I was at DEC when Cutler moved to Washington State. Rumor was that he wanted to sail on Puget Sound and Ken did not want to lose him. So they opened an office out there. I think they had him working on VAXELN, a real-time OS based on Pascal. He probably didn't like that, so Bill hired him. And NT has a lot of VMS ideas in it, which are mostly good. NT started going downhill when they moved the GDI into kernel space, to speed it up at the risk of stability.

              1. keithpeter Silver badge
                Windows

                Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

                "NT started going downhill when they moved the GDI into kernel space, to speed it up at the risk of stability"

                @Fred

                Do you think the idea of moving GDI into ring 0 occured as a result of Cutler's insisting on programmers actually running NT builds (aka dogfooding)? And realising the slowness?

                Thanks for your insights

          2. Doug 3

            Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

            Weren't the Cairo projects in response to the Taligent project at IBM and Apple? So much amazing capabilities died on the vines when that battle played out and as many times before it, death by Microsoft resulted in none of the innovations moving forward in the consumer or business software sector.

            Not to mention how virtual machine software for running Windows on other OS's ended up saving Windows in the server room. Prior to virtual machine software, Windows OS and software constantly imploding meant EVERY business service was a two-server setup. The business expense of all these Windows server and all the people to support them had many starting to wonder why they moved from UNIX. The consolidation virtual machines enabled solved the problem of corporate IT expenses pulling the whole business down.

            OpenDoc, Bento filesystem, Taligent, CORBA, etc were game changers but being cross platform made them all a Microsoft target.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              CORBA

              That was such a vulgar beast. Right up their with Kerberos for the "most miserable slog through a specification award.

              Turns out that it was a PITA for most people to implement, and faster and lighter message passing frameworks blew the doors off of it.

              Not that is wasn't a decent idea in an abstract sense, just over-engineered, slower and less agile than it's brethren would become. Other's might have used it for more robust projects, but it always got caught in a squeeze where the pain of implementing it on smaller projects was avoided by faster/beefier hardware, and it was knocked out on the HPC space for performance reasons. Few times I ran into it in the wild were Frankenstein nightmares running old Java code.

              1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

                Re: CORBA

                CORBA is still a big player. We sell millions of dollars of CORBA technology every year. It's quite prominent in certain industrial sectors, such as telecoms.

          3. vBuck

            Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

            It's really a shame they killed WinFS it could have been a crypto-proof file system 20 years ago.

          4. Vometia has insomnia. Again. Silver badge

            Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

            Since Cutler wrote most of VAX VMS

            This rumour is certainly persistent. It's nearly 30 years since I repeated it myself and I was disabused of it pretty severely; it's been long enough that I don't recall the exact details (though the bulk of the internal VaxNotes conferences are now online... somewhere) but ISTR the correction was that not only did he not actually write most of it but that he was in fact a fairly minor contributor overall. That would explain why my first actual experience of NT was a bit of a let-down, perhaps: a worthy successor to VMS it most certainly was not. I dunno if he was a deliberate self-publicist but he very loudly espoused several notably controversial opinions such as Unix being no good and having no future, his contribution to DEC's internal war between the mid-range and large systems (I suspect Cutler was the target of the oft-repeated "small computer thinking" accusation) and even outside of DEC and MS the controversies continued with the disaster that was the PlayStation 2.

      2. Vometia has insomnia. Again. Silver badge

        Re: ...the people creating NT were poached from DEC

        Primarily Dave Cutler. We had the VMS source code and he had written most of it.

        Back when I worked at DEC I was warned against giving Cutler too much credit: as much as he was happy to take it, VMS was not the work of one man. I can't really say for certain either way but I've since observed that he doesn't seem to have been an especially easy person to work with and had some rather unhelpful and polarising opinions about various subjects.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I worked for a company that sold DEC Alpha workstations. Definitely NT and I would have sworn an early version of Windows 2000.

      Do remember PowerFX! Software though. You ran the x86 software and the fx will emulate/recompile

  3. Jason Fitzpatrick

    X64 NT4

    Pretty sure there was a NT4 custom spin for DEC alpha which was a 64bit architecture https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT_4.0

    I used to run this on a DEC Multia with the Alpha upgrade..

    1. Jason Fitzpatrick

      Re: X64 NT4

      Damn, it was a Celebris with the Alpha upgrade and 2000, need coffee,

      But NT4 was a supported OS on Alpha

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEC_Alpha

      Operating systems that support Alpha included OpenVMS (formerly named OpenVMS AXP), Tru64 UNIX (formerly named DEC OSF/1 AXP and Digital UNIX), Windows NT (discontinued after NT 4.0; and prerelease Windows 2000 RC2),[2] Linux (Debian, SUSE,[3] Gentoo and Red Hat), BSD UNIX (NetBSD, OpenBSD and FreeBSD up to 6.x), Plan 9 from Bell Labs, and the L4Ka::Pistachio kernel. A port of Ultrix to Alpha was carried out during the initial development of the Alpha architecture, but was never released as a product.[4]

    2. Liam Proven (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

      Re: X64 NT4

      [Author here]

      Erm. You *did* read the bootnote, right? You should.

      1. the Kris

        Re: X64 NT4

        I didn't realise bootnotes are meant to correct article titles!?

  4. MrMerrymaker

    Windows 2000 64bit

    Automatically qualifies as the best version of Windows on a 64 bit system.

  5. Omnipresent Bronze badge
    Coffee/keyboard

    Time to start over.

    This is an opportunity boys and girls. Get to hacking. This time do it right, and leave the robots out of it. I'll be waiting.

  6. karlkarl Silver badge

    Windows 2000 really did get around didn't it. I miss the days when Microsoft produced some useful software.

    I was always interested in what one of our fellow commentors mentioned here:

    https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2021/11/29/a_new_windows_3x_mouse/#c_4375099

    A Windows 2000 on 64-bit multicore MIPS?

    1. StargateSg7

      Yup! There was a 64-bit version of Windows 2000! Ran it on Itanium and MIPS at our labs when we still had deep access to Microsoft tech-heads! Usually used in Banking and Finance where large flat memory spaces were desired for keeping lots of accounting, fast-trading and financial modeling variables that were to be kept in fast system RAM all a once. (i.e. more than 4 Gigabytes of RAM!) --- Ha ha My personal gaming PC has 256 Gigabytes of RAM in 2023!

      The more variables you can monitor in real-time in system RAM meant FASTER trading which meant more micro-slices of profit per trade could be done per day. Some individual traders I knew back then were running the 64-bit Windows 2000 system and had paid over $750,000 for such hardware/software systems in the 1990's .....BUT.... were literally profiting $100,000 USD PER DAY (tens of millions per year in NET personal profit!) by running all those variables in main memory all at once using a 64-bit workstation-based Windows 2000 system! More than a few eventually became $250 Million Dollar net-worth Fast-Trade Icons in New York, London, Tokyo and Hong Kong starting in the heady days of the 1990's!

      V

      1. Phones Sheridan Silver badge

        What game uses that 256GB RAM?

        1. Piro Silver badge

          Maybe he uses it as a ramdisk to install the game on.

          They *are* getting huge these days

      2. cozappz

        What MoBo for 2023 gaming rig?

      3. bigphil9009

        Sure buddy, sure you knew them. Why do people upvote this shite?

    2. Alan Bourke

      Given its dominance on the desktop and corporate server world

      and office applications, it appears to still produce useful software. Stupid thing to say,

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Given its dominance on the desktop and corporate server world

        > it appears to still produce useful software

        Alongside Powerpoint, Onenote, Outlook, Teams and other management time sucks ?

        1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

          Re: Given its dominance on the desktop and corporate server world

          SQL Server is ... OK.

          I understand some people like VSCode; I have no reason to try it, m'self.

          As managed-code environments go, I like some aspects of CLR and the .NET Framework.

          All of Office is horrible. Venomous Studio is horrible, as is MSVC when used outside VS (though marginally less horrible that way). Teams is excruciating. Windows keeps getting worse.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Given its dominance on the desktop and corporate server world

        They produce useful cloud services now.

  7. Alan Bourke

    Actualy came across a 64-bit XP on a customer site.

    Just the once.

    1. Youngdog

      Re: Actualy came across a 64-bit XP on a customer site.

      I helped get XP64 up and working at my place for a specific business problem. Worked so well the firm dropped plans to support Win7 32-bit and the whole place went to 64-bit instead. Which was nice.

      1. Alan W. Rateliff, II

        Re: Actualy came across a 64-bit XP on a customer site.

        I did this internally. I was running XP64 on my own systems as soon as I had a CPU capable of 64-bit, which was my first Core2Duo. XP-64 bit worked so well for me, that when customers were upgrading from XP to Windows 7, since it was usually a new computer or a fresh load (no upgrading x86 to x64,) I was pushing 7x64.

        I did an install of Vista x64 once... it was more of a disaster than 32-bit Vista.

        Why do we keep saying the 9x Windows are "DOS-based?" Once the 9x kernel boots, the Win32 system takes over and the DOS subsystem is elevated to a VM, providing a compatibility layer for 16-bit drivers when needed.

        1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

          Re: Actualy came across a 64-bit XP on a customer site.

          Why do we keep saying the 9x Windows are "DOS-based?" Once the 9x kernel boots, the Win32 system takes over and the DOS subsystem is elevated to a VM, providing a compatibility layer for 16-bit drivers when needed.
          This is because these versions of Windows were unable to boot themselves, they require another operating system to start and initialise the computer then start Windows. Therefore they were dependent on DOS. Compare this to NT which booted straight into the NT Kernel and didn't require a different OS to be loaded first.

          1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

            Re: Actualy came across a 64-bit XP on a customer site.

            Still not really "DOS-based", though. DOS was just used as a monitor to bootstrap the OS.

            My car needs an electric starter motor to get the ICE engine started, but it's not "electric-based".

    2. Snapshot

      Re: Actualy came across a 64-bit XP on a customer site.

      I have two OEM copies of it here so it can't have been that rare.

  8. Roger Lipscombe

    Windows XP x64

    "However, if you were really keen, it was possible to obtain Windows XP Professional X64 Edition".

    Yeah. I had a copy. If I remember correctly, it came in a dark grey case. I might still have it around here somewhere, but that would require digging around in the boxes we've stored under the eaves.

    1. chivo243 Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Windows XP x64

      This came in very handy a few times...

      1. Potty Professor
        Windows

        Re: Windows XP x64

        I'm still running it!

    2. Marty McFly Silver badge
      Pint

      Re: Windows XP x64

      I ran it on my production workstation for years, until I was finally forced to go Win7. Ran good my comparison to the other OS's of the day.

      Yes, it was a secret little quiet release. I always suspected MSFT intended it for Power Users so they could gather some real world feedback before going mainstream with x64.

    3. terry 1

      Re: Windows XP x64

      I seem to recall the MS Action Pack came with XP x64 DVD

    4. Ozan

      Re: Windows XP x64

      All I remember about 64bit XP is that it was weirdly buggy.

      1. Alan W. Rateliff, II

        Re: Windows XP x64

        All I remember about 64bit XP is that it was weirdly buggy.

        In what ways? The biggest problems I had running XP64 was drivers and some programs simply did not like the 64-bit environment, but compatibility mode often saved the day. For drivers, if I could not find XP64-native drivers (which was, surprisingly, not often,) I would use Server 2003 x64 drivers. 64-bit programs ran brilliantly, and I ran everything 64-bit I could get my hands on. Honestly one of my first pleasant experiences with desktop Windows.

    5. anothercynic Silver badge

      Re: Windows XP x64

      They actually made a pretty consumer box for it too, because I own one. It came in a translucent DVD box inside the classic cardboard box (with licence card), and the disc had holographic printing on it.

      XP x64 was pretty useful actually. A bit of a shame though that not much supported x64 until later OSes, not particularly helped by the sh**show that was Vista.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    DEC vs Intel

    "Ended up owning alpha"

    There is quite a bit to that story and all the industry pundits prattling on about DEC not having a chance in their lawsuit and then Intel settling for a very hefty amount took a FAB off their hands, CPU discounts, cash. https://techmonitor.ai/technology/dec_gets_a_right_result_from_intel_suit

    You see I actually rang up an Alpha cpu person in that timeframe and asked this person among other things what they were up to. Said person told me they was doing a lot of patent research, which struck me as a bit odd. Sure enough, 6 months later a lawsuit. This person told me they were very instrumental in the whole lawsuit in the first place. DEC had Intel by the short hairs and both parties knew it. They stole a number of key patents. So what do you do? You settle with the agreement to not admitting guilt. That is how the game is played. But the money tells a different story about guilt, doesn't it? No names please all around.

    1. Roo
      Windows

      Re: DEC vs Intel

      Alpha was also somewhat hamstrung by export controls - allegedly lobbied for by Intel, meanwhile Intel's parts had no such controls imposed against them and Intel were able to successfully lobby against controls being imposed long after their products had surpassed the Alpha.

  10. wsm

    NT4 64-bit on obsolete Alpha systems

    When I worked under a Microsoft support contract, answering the phones as Microsoft Tech Support, we had the occasional call for NT4 on an Alpha. Our callers would tell us that they would not give up their machines because of the 64-bit processing and the calculation rate being much faster for their large batch processing tasks, frequently performed with the assistance of custom applications.

    One of the supervisors of the contract had a side hustle as a recycler of old circuit boards and harvesting the gold from them. Believe me, he made some cash that way. One day, he ran across an old Alpha system which had by then been discontinued. He brought it in and we could finally see what we were being described over the phone.

    The trouble usually was that when NT4 had a new service pack, many of the older Alpha systems would not update. It seems that the firmware necessary for boot would burn in and not accept updates. We had to tell the Alpha people that we could not fix hardware, that they were stuck unless they could replace the relevant parts.

    It's not always Microsoft that is at fault, they're just a convenient target because of their tendency to create faults.

    1. rcxb Silver badge

      Re: NT4 64-bit on obsolete Alpha systems

      It seems that the firmware necessary for boot would burn in and not accept updates. We had to tell the Alpha people that we could not fix hardware, that they were stuck unless they could replace the relevant parts. It's not always Microsoft that is at fault, they're just a convenient target because of their tendency to create faults.

      AlphaBIOS was entirely Microsoft's own doing, and a lingering ulcer on the Alpha landscape. If they would have bootstrapped off of the normal SRM firmware like VAX, VMS, Linux, BSD, etc., they wouldn't have gotten their customers into that situation.

  11. Teejay

    A friend of mine was an early Alpha geek, but I think he decidedly enjoyed the fact that is was Unix and not Windows.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      DEC decided that we should replace all our Micro-Vaxen with Alphas - so they increased our maintenance contract to ludicrous mode.

      Another bit of DEC were selling Alphas bundled with NT for 1/2 price of the same Alpha with VMS

      So we bought a bunch of the NT workstations and installed Linux, RedHat IIRC, only issue was a fixed frequency monitor so you couldn't see anything until you got X windows configured perfectly. That took a weekend - thank Dave for an RS232 console port

  12. trevorde Silver badge

    Unloved, even by its parent

    A company I worked for many years ago, had one of the first Itanium development systems with a whopping 1GB or RAM. It was loaned to us by Intel so they could use our company as a poster child for Itanium. One of our team was assigned the task of porting just the viewer part of our main product (MCAD system) to 64bit Windows on Itanium. After a lot of effort, swearing at the beta level compilers, and direct help from Intel, he managed to get it up and staggering. It was demoed at the next user conference to extreme indifference.

    The system then sat in a cupboard for about 5 years until the sysadmin was having a cleanout. He called Intel about sending it back and was told to keep it as they didn't want it. He then offered it around the office (for free) but there were still no takers.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    XP 64

    Years ago I bought my now-ex-wife a laptop and specially ordered XP 64-bit for her. She stalked me for years after the divorce and I could always tell it was her because of the browser agent in the web server logs. It was the only 64-bit XP I ever saw. I'm sure she's still available for nights and weekends.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wait... What?!?!?!?

    I am totally confused about this being a "Never released" version of Windows 2000. I ran and supported this version for quite a while (sadly it was the last DEC Alpha I got to work with). It was an amazing version of Windows 2000. I never, ever, had a blue screen from it. It was the most stable version of Windows server that I ever worked with and the fastest. I was an alpha/beta tester of NT from the very beginning, along with the DEC Alpha where I worked. I'm also old enough to actually use Widnows 1.0 BTW. My whole IT career was running/supporting Windows products.

    Actually, we got to work with A LOT of DEC hardware/software that never made it to market as we were given stuff to try out before everyone else. One person I worked with was the most creative sysadmin I have ever worked with in my life. He found ways to configure DEC stuff that even the DEC engineers couldn't believe was possible. They were always visiting and going over what he did, and then taking that info back with them and incorporating it into the final release. DEC also asked us to be a "tour" site, so they could show off their stuff on a live location to potential customers.

    Sorry about the digression, but back to the 64bit Windows 2000. One of the most amazing "features" (Control panel, Program and features, Windows Features) you could enable was the "Real time recompilation" of 32 bit non DEC Alpha compiled programs into 64 bit DEC Alpha compiled programs. Meaning you could install say 32 bit intel program or service, and it would just run as normal. BUT as you ran it, it would be recompiled in the background to a 64 Alpha binary. The more you ran it, more and more of the binary would be converted. And let me tell you, even 32 bit Intel software ran FASTER on the Alpha than any other Intel CPU at the time (when you enabled "Real time recompilation") the first time you ran it. After the binary was recompiled in the background, it ran faster than anything.

    I thought this was common knowledge this whole time that this version of Windows 2000 existed. But in hindsight, with this just now new information I know why people looked at me funny when I would reminisce of the "Good old days" of working the DEC Alpha Windows and how amazing it was.

    1. rcxb Silver badge

      Re: Wait... What?!?!?!?

      Windows 2000 for Alpha never got a production release.

      "there was a build for the Alpha which was abandoned in the final stages of development (between RC1 and RC2[27]) after Compaq announced they had dropped support for Windows NT on Alpha."

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2000

      "Build 5.00.2128.1 RC2 AXP is the last build available for the DEC Alpha CPU. "

      https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-nt-2000/rc-2

      There was a 444-day timebomb before they expired, but it wasn't very difficult to work-around... set your clock forward several years before installing, then turn it back, for example...

      MIPS and PowerPC got mostly the same treatment by Microsoft, with Windows 2000 support being dropped even earlier.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Wait... What?!?!?!?

        I guess I was one of the lucky ones to have gotten ahold of this version. Thinking back, I guess since we such a "test site" it was natural to for us to get pre-releases that never made to production. I just assumed it eventually made it to production. It seems like yesterday I was working with this stuff, but I'm retired now.

    2. DS999 Silver badge

      Re: Wait... What?!?!?!?

      Are you sure that was a 64 bit edition? Microsoft released 32 bit versions of Windows 2000 Pro for Alpha as well as other architectures, that is almost certainly what you were running.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Wait... What?!?!?!?

        I am absolutely POSITIVE it was a 64 bit edition. But remember I did say we were a "test site" and got to play with a lot "new" stuff. I guess this was a pre-release that I assumed made it to production.

    3. martinusher Silver badge

      Re: Wait... What?!?!?!?

      This was a good quarter century or more ago, an age in computing terms. We've got generations of IT workers who have grown up with two sorts of processors, the x86 and the ARM, and know of no others. The fact that both these architectures are among the slowest, achieving speed through heroic clock rates, multiple cores, huge amounts of memory and cache and so on isn't that well understood. By unearthing and making known some of these earlier architectures we get a feel for just how fast they were and how fast similar architectures are likely to be in the future (RISC-V, for example).

      As for Win2K, call me a curmudgeon or whatever but I still think it was the last truly usable version of Windows.

  15. Eri

    Occam’s razor

    You don’t need a conspiracy to explain x64’s success.

    worked on the ms compilers including alpha and itanium. Alpha was still great for fp but integer perf lagged. Writing on the wall their expensive chips had awful code size and big mispredict penalty. Main thing I remember about alpha was the delayed fp exceptions so arrive after pc had moved some instructions from where fault occurred. Made compiler complex and fp exceptions expensive to process. People romancing alpha perf are probably really saying the software they ran was written well because the chip itself couldn’t justify its price, nor could dec continue to scale the clock or make their dies bigger. It’s bad like p4 with too deep pipeline.

    Itanium? It was slow, and every rev intel would claim it was fast now but was still slow. Horrible code size. Hilariously bad instruction set. Most core workloads couldn’t be scheduled well. And hardware support for calling convention, rolling register window? And yet dog slow.

    Arm32 also had terrible code size, wasted space on those predication bits. It won in mobile because it was cheap to license.

    Fact is x64 won because it was better, no need for any hidden finger on the scale. While dec and intel chased pie in sky compute insanity, Amd did the smart thing and won the arch war.

    Ps: I do wish ms had deployed an x64 os with support for x64 instruction set and 32 bit address space. Provides additional registers and better calling convention without need to waste memory storing 8 byte pointers, even 20 years later most processes don’t need more than 2gb of ram. Important users of the time had committed so many crimes with 16 and 32 bit pointers that ms decided to keep things simple for x64.

    1. druck Silver badge

      Re: Occam’s razor

      Arm32 also had terrible code size, wasted space on those predication bits. It won in mobile because it was cheap to license.

      This was addressed very early on with the Thumb instruction set.

      1. abend0c4 Silver badge

        Re: Occam’s razor

        The great thing about reduced instruction sets is there are so many to choose from!

  16. Annihilator

    History

    Love reading the linked articles, particularly this one from 1999 (the first Itanic reference) which is describing how Athlon isn't a threat to Intel. From memory, it was shortly after then that AMD dominated with their Athlon then Athlon XP processors, while Intel churned out the Pentium 4 and Pentium D, power hungry gigahertz chasing beasts that set Intel back until they launched the Core 2 Duo range.

  17. rcxb Silver badge

    Mine's still going strong

    I've gotten a lot of mileage out of my DEC Personal Workstation. My first foray into 64-bit and non-x86 platforms, I learned about compiling/porting software that helped a lot later on. For a couple decades I'd roll my eyes at people fawning over incredible new case designs from Apple and others, as my PWS from the 90's had 3 zones, variable speed fans, and a motherboard that slid-out toolless with just two levers to pull.

    I recently decided it was time to upgrade the old girl. The installed 256MB of RAM was unable to compile some software (on OpenBSD), and the only remaining Linux distro for Alpha (Gentoo) needs more RAM just to boot-up. Unfortunately I waited too long and 8-chip PC100 RAM has become rare enough that it wasn't dirt cheap, but it worked, and I should get good use out of my Alpha for many more years.

    Other upgrades were more convenient.

    All 80mm fans including the PSU fan were replaced with quieter new (also variable-speed) units

    To ensure I'd be able to keep using the system in the event of a PSU failure, I tried powering it up with a stock ATX PSU. There's a special 6-pin connector in the original PSU, but the only bit needed was short the front two pins and the system boots and operates perfectly.

    A spare 4-port USB 2.0 PCI card I was about to throw out worked perfectly in my Alpha, as well as did a USB Wi-Fi dongle, which is quite the strange thing to have on such a system. Unfortunately USB keyboards don't work in the SRM firmware, and a PS/2 keyboard must be plugged-in or the graphics is switched off and console switches over to the local console. Still good for mice and other peripherals.

    I happened to find the thin (0.5") mini (no numpad) model of keyboard I prefer and use, had its chips originally designed in the transition days, so a PS2/USB converter plug commonly found on mice works nicely to make it work in the PS/2 port, and I've got several of them stockpiled as spares as they were quite cheap and each held up for more years than I expected.

    Threw in a second NIC because again I had some PCI cards I would otherwise have thrown out.

    Installed a PCI SATA controller as well. Got a 0.5TB drive running from the built-in IDE controller working fine, but was looking to ensure future compatibility. SRM won't boot off the SATA add-in card, but I can bootstrap from floppy, CD-ROM, network, or maybe a small IDE flash (CF?) drive then switch over to the SATA early in the boot process. Disk I/O really didn't improve, capped at 25MB/s probably due to the old 33MHz PCI bus. There are 64-bit PCI-X slots, but there was a hardware issue, so practically no cards are compatible.

    Still got my QLogic SCSI card in there. The RaSCSI devices sound good, one SCSI device that serves as multiple virtual drives, Wi-Fi networking, and more, while being remotely reconfigurable is sure tempting, but it's all too ironic that the computer in the RaSCSI supporting it, is far more powerful than the one in the actual system. Reminds me of an IBM mainframe, which won't even boot-up without a Thinkpad Laptop "support element", an HMC computer, and even then, all storage is external as well...

    Video is an old ATI r128 PCI card, rather than DEC's original TGA monster (which means no GUI with NetBSD). Lots of ATI cards worked on DEC Alpha, while none of the Nvidia PCI cards I tried would come up at all. Guess they just didn't care about openfirmware support.

    Runs modern Linux / OpenBSD software just fine if you aren't in a great hurry... headless server with RS232 console, or hooked-up to a monitor via VGA which most still include. Connects up nicely over RS232 to my old QVT109 terminal I've been keeping as well. I don't have a big retro systems collection, just a few key devices that give a good idea of just how the computing world has evolved.

    1. neozeed

      Re: Mine's still going strong

      So just after this got published I was porting some games, and my Alpha just died. I think it is the PSU. Is there a way to reachout for some pictures of what you did with that ATX psu? I had just released all the non identifying bits, and then the machine dies. HALP!!!111one

      https://virtuallyfun.com/

      1. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

        Re: Mine's still going strong

        I wish you luck either finding a replacement or some electronics specialist who knows how to repair those! I hope you make it before next VCF! (Even though I cannot be there, rightpondian)

        1. neozeed

          Re: Mine's still going strong

          Looks like i'll have a slideshow of a few pictures I took before it died ...

      2. rcxb Silver badge

        Re: Mine's still going strong

        I think it is the PSU. Is there a way to reachout for some pictures of what you did with that ATX psu?

        Photo:

        https://i.ibb.co/t8nPMxB/Alpha-PWS-ATX-power.jpg

        You only need to replicate the green jumper wire next to "ALPHA POWER".

        I misremembered it as 6-pin, it's a 10-pin connector, but only the green jumper is essential.

        A 4-pin ATX power connector cut off an old PSU fits nicely on the left side of that socket. You just short one of the black and one of the yellow wires together.

        With that, and an ATX PSU hooked-up normally (20-pin connector), it should power on.

        1. rcxb Silver badge

          Re: Mine's still going strong

          Came back to see how his progress was going, but pretty quiet here. Looks as though updates are being posted on Patreon.

          * It'd always been a lifetime goal to get written about in the register And it just happened. I just wanted to share this with everyone! Thanks for enabling this to happen! May 19

          * Naturally as soon as we hit the register the alpha died I was just about to start building neko98, and the Alpha suddenly shut off. Sometimes it'll power up, star the normal process even, then imm... May 22

          * While waiting for capacitors to try to fix the Alpha, I thought I'd try to tackle something absolutely insane. Building a SNA network. May 26

          * It’s alive!!! 2 days ago

          Photo on the last one shows him using a 4-pin connector as suggested, and a normal ATX PSU:

          https://i.ibb.co/JsQ9Z1B/neozeed-virtuallyfun-fixing-Alpha-PWS-thumbnail.jpg

          So, was it swapping the PSU or replacing capacitors that did it? Perhaps it will merit a mention in a future blog post.

      3. ex_ussr1

        Re: Mine's still going strong -too

        I have loads of bits of those. You can get a PSU from me.

        Was literally GIVEN 4 miata from Mainz Uni, or they would go in the skip.

        I still have ONE workstation running Win 2000 beta, and the LYNX ONE PCI studio audio card (Beta drivers were made available), so it can record 24-96 audio with no clicks or glitches.

        That one had MS office, and lots of funny stuff running on it.

        The DEC (can be overclocked nicely btw) is still fast compared with win 11, although browser absence makes it useless for anything from www.

        1. rcxb Silver badge

          Re: Mine's still going strong -too

          although browser absence makes it useless for anything from www.

          The MyPal browser still supports XP, and KernelEx will allow running it on 2000:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot6CyCwdomk

          There was a significant community of people keeping 2000 running modern software.

          Not sure where they've gone off to, now that the msfn boards are gone:

          https://web.archive.org/web/20230327173706/https://msfn.org/board/forum/35-windows-20002003nt4/

          Latest KernelEx updates:

          https://web.archive.org/web/20230206092120/https://msfn.org/board/topic/173233-kernelex-2022-kex22-test-versions-422262/

          https://web.archive.org/web/20230331131203/https://msfn.org/board/topic/173233-kernelex-2022-kex22-test-versions-422262/page/54/

          Here's the rest of my misc Windows 2000 upgrade links in case anyone needs them:

          https://www.techspot.com/community/topics/windows-2000-oldcigarettes-windows-2000-xp-api-wrapper-pack.167843/

          http://blog.livedoor.jp/blackwingcat/archives/1299806.html

          https://w.atwiki.jp/win2000/pages/17.html

          Not involved in such myself. I'm perfectly happy running modern Linux with lightweight desktops. A former employer had several Windows 2000 server systems running long after EoL so I was often searching around for fixes to various issues and last supported versions of software. With that, I stumbled upon these community efforts, and kept track of them due to amazement at how difficult I saw they would be to locate for anyone actually looking for them. I do miss the old days, back when search engines like Google would actually find what you were looking for. Of course in the pre-google days, search results were much, much worse.

  18. Kirkaiya

    64-bit Win 2000 on Alpha was known about internally

    I was a "v-" employee at Microsoft from 2001 - 2004, and I knew about the Windows 2000 on Dec Alpha - it wasn't a secret at the time. I was running Windows 2000 on an x86 laptop, and I remember seeing the Alpha version on an internal software repo (might have been an iso, I don't remember anymore). I never realized it had drifted into becoming myth lol.

  19. Smirnov

    Errors in the article

    "The first desktop version of Windows to officially support 64-bit processors out of the box was Windows Vista in 2006. However, if you were really keen, it was possible to obtain Windows XP Professional X64 Edition – in fact, based on the Windows Server 2003 codebase rather than XP per se – sometime earlier. [...] Before AMD's Sledgehammer range of processors, announced in 2000 and on sale in 2003, the only official 64-bit Windows were server versions for Intel's ill-fated Itanium processor family, which The Register was already referring to as Itanic back in 1999."

    Actually, the first 64bit Windows release version was "Windows XP Professional 64bit Edition" which was for IA64 (Itanium) and which was released in 2001, long before the "Windows XP Professional x64 Edition" for AMDs x64 architecture was released, and this was a desktop version which could be regularly ordered as part of a HP's Itanium workstation (i2000 at first, zx2000/zx6000 later).

    A couple of years after "Windows XP Professional 64bit Edition" there also was "Windows Server 2003 64bit Edition" (the first Windows server release version) and another desktop Windows variant ("Windows XP Professional 64bit Edition 2002") which was based on the Windows Server code base.

    "A preview 64-bit version of Windows 2000 Server for Itanium was released to Technet subscribers in 2001. All the other non-Intel versions of Windows 2000 were discontinued before the product was released, although 32-bit beta versions running on Alpha, MIPS, and PowerPC had been spotted in the wild. At launch, Windows 2000 was x86-32 only."

    Indeed, there also have been a number of W2k Professional and (Advanced) Server previews for IA64, although none of them made it to release.

    I remember this because back then we got some of the first Itanium machines from HP and SGI, as well as some pre-release hardware. I ran Windows XP Professional 64bit Edition on a HP i2000 as one of my workstations back then, plus a number of rx4610 and rx9610 running some of the W2k Server pre-releases. Plus another block of these machines running HP-UX.

    1. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

      Re: Errors in the article

      You only mention 2000/XP versions made for OEM with specific machines. No other way to get them. I wouldn't call that "out of the box" support for 64-bit, like it is with Vista when you buy it. It is like saying "Windows Storage Server 2003 was officially widely available" while it was actually bundled with hardware.

      1. Smirnov

        Re: Errors in the article

        "You only mention 2000/XP versions made for OEM with specific machines. No other way to get them. I wouldn't call that "out of the box" support for 64-bit, like it is with Vista when you buy it."

        Of course I only mention IA64 Windows which was sold as OEM version with specific systems, for the sole reason that there were no wide range of IA64 white-box systems or custom build components so hobbyists could build an IA64 PC as there was for x86/x64 (the only IA64 white box system were intel's OEM version of what was sold by HP, SGI and others, and it wasn't even openly available), which means there was no reason for a retail version of IA64 Windows to exist because there was no-one who would have bought such a thing (also IA64 wasn't exactly targeted at consumers, with entry level prices for something like a single processor HP i2000 starting around $10k).

        I really fail to see the connection between the channel an operating is sold through and the operating system's architecture. Probably because there is none.

        "It is like saying "Windows Storage Server 2003 was officially widely available" while it was actually bundled with hardware."

        I surely hope you're not suggesting that, just because Windows Storage Server 2003 was only available as OEM version, it didn't exist or wasn't publicly released, because frankly that would be silly. Many operating systems are only sold in combination with specific hardware, for example mac OS, Google Android (only AOSP is free), or the remaining commercial UNIXes (such as AIX or NonStop UNIX).

        Besides, outside the USA (the land of shrink wrap licenses) Windows Storage Server 2003 OEM licenses were widely available without hardware.

        So you really want to suggest that, say, mac OS isn't a 64bit OS in a way Vista 64bit was simply because it's only sold with specific hardware?

        1. Jou (Mxyzptlk) Silver badge

          Re: Errors in the article

          > So you really want to suggest that, say, mac OS isn't a 64bit OS in a way Vista 64bit was simply because it's only sold with specific hardware?

          For the Windows world: My point is the "out of the box", a box that is on the shelf for everyone to buy openly without restrictions. Not bundled with hardware. That came with Vista.

          Why switch to Mac world for comparison here?

  20. Christopher F Clark (intel_chris)

    Does anyone know if that C compiler was based on the OSF C compiler or the GEM one?

    If it was based on the OSF C/C++ compiler, that was Ken Lesniak's, Bob Morgan's, and my "child". We took the MIPS/SGI compiler (Fred Chow's) work and retargeted it to the Alpha, with the help of Len Lattanzi and one other person whose name eludes me from MIPS/SGI. By the way, what I thought was most clever about it is how Ken figured out how to run 32 bit (i.e. GCC and Vax code) on a 64-bit OS without any source code changes (i.e. it was still 32 bit code and the OS was still 64 bit).

  21. Lee D Silver badge

    And I'm still fighting (parts of) systems that I've inherited with 32-bit Windows or 32-bit Office.

    I literally remember 9 years ago questioning why we were deploying 32-bit anything still, and back then it was already basically impossible to purchase a 32-bit x86 chip of any use.

    I still see machines with only 4Gb of RAM, in fact, which is laughable nowadays.

    But only the other day I had to explain to a tech why there is Program Files and Program Files (x86).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like