Comments on: Microsoft Fortran Powerstation 1.0

By: Nicolae POP

Nicolae POP — Tue, 07 Apr 2020 16:04:40 +0000

By: neozeed

neozeed — Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:35:28 +0000

In reply to calvin.

All I can think is that it was built around the time of the NT 3.1 betas’ and the Win32 hype machine that kind of fell flat until Windows 95. There was a lot of hope and excitement, especially in an OS that was POSIX, and Windows compliant with an eye to the future. Sadly that OS wouldn’t be Windows NT.

Windows 7 with SUA was about as good as it got, then they killed off SUA for reasons unknown, and subverted Windows with metro. Kind of amazing to see how the new “leadership” destroyed the twin pillars of Office, and Windows in a few short years.

By: calvin

calvin — Fri, 08 Aug 2014 18:30:39 +0000

lots of old NT 3.1 era things have problems with RtlExAllocateHeap – found an FTP with things like them and nope

By: neozeed

neozeed — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 16:01:55 +0000

In reply to Yuhong Bao. Was there a PowerStation 1.0 for NT? I was under the impression it was an MS-DOS only product, with NT pre-release tech.

By: Yuhong Bao

Yuhong Bao — Sat, 17 Aug 2013 04:35:22 +0000

In reply to neozeed. I'd suggest replacing FL32 with a copy from Fortran PowerStation 1.0 for Windows NT. You'd think MS would consolidate the two products into one.

By: neozeed

neozeed — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:03:48 +0000

In reply to Yuhong Bao. I found a copy of Fortran 1.0a, and.. they "fixed" the runtime, but the compiler is still the same, bound with the same broken runtime so you can't run it under NT. You'd think they would have taken the time to do that much but apparently not.

By: Yuhong Bao

Yuhong Bao — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 07:43:41 +0000

I remember reading about a Fortran PowerStation 1.0a for DOS that fixed the problem while preserving DOS support . BTW, MASM 6.1 and Visual C++ 1.0 also had the same problem.