Yes, at least they come from contemporary documents; everything is checkable at Google Books. Earliest I've found is from 1603, by Robert Parsons, a fellow and tutor at Balliol, Oxford (bio at Wikipedia):

http://books.google.pl/books?id=yS4CAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA108&dq=%22different+to%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cQDcUt-bDuLN7AaFioC4Dg&ved=0CC0Q6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=%22different%20to%22&f=false

Several examples from Smollett's The Critical Review 1762 - and a complaint about its used as early as 1771, not to mention several accounts as to how it was used in England in the nineteenth century. Just check Google Books for the eighteenth century and nineteenth centuries (you can filter searches very precisely).

Thomas Paine 1914 - http://books.google.pl/books?id=3j4wAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22different%20to%22&pg=RA1-PA13&ci=64%2C950%2C813%2C161&source=bookclip

Lord Palmertson 1839 - http://books.google.pl/books?id=QcMMAQAAIAAJ&dq=%22different%20to%22&pg=PA83&ci=47%2C1251%2C429%2C210&source=bookclip

Robert Owen1841 - http://books.google.pl/books?id=mIouAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22different%20to%22&pg=PA48&ci=172%2C875%2C698%2C199&source=bookclip

If it was such a recent phenomenon, why was Fowler defending it in 1928? In fact the ratio of from / to is higher now in British (13.8:1) books that any time in the past, according to Ngram, - in 1880 it was 10.9:1, so I think this recent upsurge thing is based on your youth in Scottish schools. My education was partly in English schools, which was no doubt where I picked it up. It's standard British English. You may not like it, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it.

http://random-idea-english.blogspot.com/2014/01/random-thoughts-about-on-tomorrow.html

"Numerous commentators have condemned different than in spite of its use since the 17th century by many of the best-known names in English literature. It is nevertheless standard and is even recommended in many handbooks when followed by a clause, because insisting on from in such instances often produces clumsy or wordy formulations. Different from, the generally safe choice, is more common especially when it is followed by a noun or pronoun." - Merriam-Webster Online

Incidentally, on "different to": if it was good enough for Thomas Paine, Lord Palmerston and Robert Owen, it's good enough for me.

OK, the conditional's probably OK as it refers to a possible future event, but I still think you have a problem with 'although' and 'but' in the same clause.

Trivial little cultural language difference - we Brits mainly still refer to Christmas, whatever our religion is (or isn't). And for us it's New Year without an s, except in the genitive with a noun: New Year's Eve, New Year's Day - so, Happy New Year to you.

I was a bit sceptical about jayles Ngram idea, after all there are perfectly standard incidences of 'on tomorrow', eg: 'it depends on tomorrow', 'reckoning on tomorrow', for example, and I assumed all the early instances would be of that nature, especially as many commenters here and on other forums have remarked that 'on tomorrow' is quite a recent phenomenon.

But in fact there are quite a few examples from the early nineteenth century, many of them from state legislatures - is this a special kind of legal English, or am I missing something?

"Mr. Keller gave notice, that on tomorrow he would ask leave to bring in a bill to incorporate the stockholders of the Bank of Circleville", Ohio House of Representatives 1816

"Which was read the first time, and passed to a second reading on tomorrow.", Indiana House of Representatives 1836

"Mr. Read gave notice that he will on tomorrow or next day introduce a bill in relation to the Florida peninsula and Jacksonville and the Union Rail Road companies", Florida Legislative Council 1836

"Mr. Ruttan gives notice that he will, on tomorrow, move that a select committee of five members be appointed to inquire ..." Upper Canada House of Assembly 1839

"On motion of Mr. Morris, Ordered, That the committee of Privileges and Elections take into consideration on tomorrow, the contested election from the county of Patrick." Virginia House of Delegates 1830

"On tomorrow eleven more are to receive the ordinance", The Religious Intelligencer 1822

Not all are from America:

"One of the most remarkable features of acute rheumatism is this metastasis of inflammation ; you have one joint attacked to-day, on tomorrow it will be quite free from disease", London Medical and Surgical Journal, 1833

"Mr. Speaker then put the question, which was agreed to — " that on tomorrow se'night the house resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to take into consideration the state in □which the impeachment of Warren Hastings, esq. late ...", The Town and Country Magazine, London, 1790

And a couple from The University Magazine, published in Dublin (there's a suggestion at Grammarphobia that it could also be Irish)

"On to-morrow I will brave the storm, whether successfully or not, is doubtful"

"Tell Gerard Douw ... that Minheer Vandehousen, of Rotterdam, wishes to speak with him on to-morrow evening at this hour"

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22on+tomorrow%22&lr=lang_en&sa=X&ei=DlDYUvzELOyw7Abu14HIDg&ved=0CCgQpwUoBA&source=lnt&tbs=lr%3Alang_1en%2Ccdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A1%2F1%2F1700%2Ccd_max%3A12%2F31%2F1860&tbm=bks

@jayles - Of course we do, but we don't make a rule of it. And there are good reasons for both your examples - 'al fresco' is an expression, not a word, and 'literati' is virtually only ever used in the plural - when did you last hear anyone mention a literatus (Latin) or literato - (old Italian)?

And then we play with them: to eat 'al desko' ; the 'glitterati', not to mention the 'latterati'.

And most of us, no doubt, refer to 'the hoi-polloi', even though 'hoi' already means 'the'. (Funny how those pedants who object to 'the' hoi-pollo never seem to worry about things like 'the' albatross, 'the' alcove or 'the' alcohol).

The only rule at play here is usage - and often both are possible, although we seem to have our preferences. Forums leads fora, but millennia (despite Firefox red-lining it) totally outstrips millenniums - which hardly registers in British books:

http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=forums%2Cfora%2Cmillenniums%2Cmillennia&year_start=1800&year_end=2005&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cforums%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cfora%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmillenniums%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmillennia%3B%2Cc0

Americans seem to prefer referenda to referendums by quite a margin, while Brits less definitively prefer referendums (I'm with the Americans on this one). On the other hand, I doubt many people say 'musea':

http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=referendums%3Aeng_us_2012%2Creferenda%3Aeng_us_2012%2Creferendums%3Aeng_gb_2012%2Creferenda%3Aeng_gb_2012&year_start=1800&year_end=2005&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Creferendums%3Aeng_us_2012%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Creferenda%3Aeng_us_2012%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Creferendums%3Aeng_gb_2012%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Creferenda%3Aeng_gb_2012%3B%2Cc0

Damn! Sonate.

@My Two Cents - so presumably:

Beethoven wrote five piano concerti and several piano sonati
The BBC has two symphony orchestre
The TV show should have been called 'The Soprani'
Shall I order two pizze?
Our village has several holiday ville
These paintings are repliche of the originals
Our school has two motti
The film company has studi in Hollywood
The police found two headless torsi
We went to the cathedral to look at the freschi
I saw an opera on Monday and another today so that's two opere this week already
She's having spaghetti and I'm having spaghetti, so that's two spaghetti, please.

OK, so here's my take on it (for learners)

http://random-idea-english.blogspot.com/2012/01/confusing-verbs-come-go-bring-and-take.html

I just love this one, where think is absolutely crucial:

"Skidmore Tyres had another think coming when the brakeman signalled him to back-tip. but he didn't wait for it: that think that wasn't thought may cost him his job."

Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen's Magazine 1906