Not sure if it has a name but often there’s a trend of “one thing leads to another” related articles on the HN front page.

Yesterday there was something similar that might have planted a seed in your mind like it did for other people.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46735133

I may have the answer. This website nand2mario and something like this article was here on HN a while ago. Maybe a month or two months ago. So maybe then you were busy and didn't read it fully but your mind caught it somehow from HN or coworkers/friends and now when you are relaxed you can register the stuff nicely. Typing 80386 in the search doesn't gets me that exact post.

This is probably just availability bias / frequency illusion at work. Thinking about something once makes the brain suddenly notice it everywhere. The coincidences stick, but all the misses don’t. Feels like magic, but it’s just how attention and memory play tricks.

No, no, no.

I think it's actually really simple. We tech nerds sometimes think a lot the same way.

The mind data-mines.

Yes, one can only hope Ken Shirriff eventually happens to come across one of those models, but I guess they are probably very rare these days.

Besides the multiplication, the 386 had quite a number of teething problems[1], including occasionally broken addressing modes, unrecoverable exceptions, virtual address resolution bugs around the 2G mark, etc...

A while ago, there was also an article posted here that analyzed the inner workings of the Windows/386 loader[2]. Interestingly, Windows simply checks a pair of instruction (XBTS/IBTS) that early 386 steppings had, but was later removed, raising an invalid opcode exception instead.

Raymond Chen also wrote a blog post describing a few workarounds that Windows 95 had implemented[3].

[1] https://www.pcjs.org/documents/manuals/intel/80386/

[2] https://virtuallyfun.com/2025/09/06/unauthorized-windows-386...

[3] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20110112-00/?p=11...

> AI?

Probably not; this point is well justified by both theory and practice. Supporting suitably larger operands is indeed what naturally comes following the increase of computation demands.

One point I do differ from the author is that register width don't necessarily correlate with the size of address space. Even 8bit machines can address a large space by splitting apart the logical address and using multiple registers. Likewise, having a wide register does not imply the same address width.

A lot of (older than me) enthusiasts I knew got an MSDN subscription even though they weren't really developing apps for Windows. This gave them a steady stream of OS releases on CD-ROMs, officially for testing their fictional apps. So, they were often upgrading one or more systems many times rather than buying new machines with a bundled new OS.

Personally, yeah, I had Windows 3.0/3.11 on a 386. I think I may have also put an early Windows NT (beta?) release on it, borrowing someone's MSDN discs. Not sure I had got value from it except seeing the "pipes" software OpenGL screensaver. Around '93-94, I started using Linux, and after that it was mostly upgrading hardware in my Linux Box(en) of Theseus.

I remember my college roommate blowing his budget upgrading to a 180 MHz Pentium Pro, and he put Windows 95 on it. I think that was the first time I heard the "Start me up!" sound from an actual computer instead of a TV ad.

After that, I only encountered later Windows versions if they were shipped on a laptop I got for work, before I wiped it to install Linux. Or eventually when I got an install image to put Windows in a VM. (First under VMware, later under Linux qemu+kvm.)

As somebody that was around at the time, this is not at all a stretch.

First, Linux was created FOR the 386. Linus Torvalds had one and wanted to unlock its power.

As you say, Windows 3.0 is certainly no stretch.

That leaves only Windows 95. The minimum spec at launch was a 386 with 4 MB of RAM. Realistically, you needed 8 MB to do anything.

Here is an article from 1993 saying that manufactures are beginning to drop the 386 from their product lines. That is, this is when people stopped being able to buy 386 machines brand new.

https://books.google.com/books/about/InfoWorld.html?id=2zsEA...

The 486 was the dominant chip in 1993 but there were still a lot of 386 machines being sold to that point when.

When Windows 95 shipped, people would certainly have been trying to run it on those machines.

When Windows 95 was released, people famously lined up to buy it like they were getting tickets to a rock concert. It was not just sold with new hardware. Back then, it was normal for people to pay money to buy a new operating system to run on hardware they already owned.

Of course Windows 95 certainly helped sell Pentiums. Pentium would have dominated new sales but a typical PC in service in 1995 would have been a 486 and there were still plenty of 386 machines in use.

Windows 95 was Microsoft's biggest commercial hit at that point. Selling 40m copies in its first year.

There's no doubt that it went in to upgrade plenty of 386s/486s until the owners upgraded their hardware.

I was just trying to give a bit of historical context, but apparrently need to be more precise next time! 386 is the beginning of 32 bit. But it's mainly the pentium and 486 that ran Windows 95.