User talk:Gillbates

About your Windows 1.04 screenshot

How did you get that version of Windows into 1920 x 1080 resolution? I am 99% sure it is fake because I haven't seen any patch like this before, I have only seen patches for VGA and VESA.--SArAmTaCoJeSUs (talk) 17:05, 4 November 2018 (GMT)

it is real it is patch i made myself -Preceding unsigned comment added by Gillbates (talk) 17:07, 4 November 2018‎ (GMT)

Can you prove this? Send me a copy of this "patch" an I will test it, also please use a colon to reply and sign your comments with the signature button at the top of the text box--SArAmTaCoJeSUs (talk) 17:15, 4 November 2018 (GMT)

Running Windows in 1920x1080 with 16 colors would require at the very least 1037K of memory just to store the screen data. A bit too much for an operating environment that doesn't support more than 640K of it, don't you think? --AlphaBeta (talk) 17:19, 4 November 2018 (GM

i used virtaul memoryT)--Gillbates (talk) 17:49, 4 November 2018 (GMT)--Gillbates (talk) 17:49, 4 November 2018 (GMT)

Windows before 3.0 did not even have virtual memory --Ovctvct (talk) 17:57, 4 November 2018 (GMT)

yes but i used a patch for virtual memory aswell--Gillbates (talk) 18:05, 4 November 2018 (GMT)

Then send me this patch you have made so we can verify that it is true.--SArAmTaCoJeSUs (talk) 18:27, 4 November 2018 (GMT)

Virtual memory is not something that you can add by swapping a few values in a binary. Stop lying. --AlphaBeta (talk) 20:28, 4 November 2018 (GMT)

It's obviously a troll user. --LilShootDawg (talk) 21:08, 4 November 2018 (GMT)

I agree, I have seen his other edits and they are complete nosense--SArAmTaCoJeSUs (talk) 22:09, 4 November 2018 (GMT)