RE: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet

[Ken Schaefer]

What’s the definition of a 32 bit OS? I only ask because Mark Russinovich’s book says that Win95 contained oodles of 16 bit code. So the absence of 16bit code isn’t a requirement for having a 32bit OS.   Cheers Ken   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Sunday, 13 February 2005 3:41 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org; 'Send - AD mailing list' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet   I've alway described Win95 as a 24 bit operating system myself...   Actually, the OS (i.e. the kernel) is (was) definitely 32-bit code. Rick backed into the correct answer with that damn logic thing again.   However. explorer.exe (i.e. the GUI) was most definitely a 16-bit app, because at the time they hadn't figured out all the 32 bit optimizations for graphics - they had done all the 3.x work in 16 bit. IMO - this is one of the reasons 9x has always been relatively unstable - the mixture of 16 and 32 bit code.   Roger -------- Roger Seielstad E-mail Geek & MS-MVP     From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 12:18 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org; 'Send - AD mailing list' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet Charles,   I follow your line of thinking and would tend to agree except for my first foray into Networked OS’s – Netware.  Netware is CLEARLY an OS – is CLEARLY 32-bit, but requires DOS to boot the kernel, which then continues to load the required pieces of Netware on the Netware kernel.    So, in that – Netware is not a frontend for DOS – it simply uses the load routines of DOS to get going, then switches the processor to privileged mode to operate with all of the features of the processor in 32-bit mode.   The question that should be asked is this, which should solve the current puzzle and bet:   Can Windows 95 be run on a 80286 processor?  If not – and must be run on a 80386 and greater – it’s 32-bit and using privileged mode and the features that it affords.   The answer to the above question is no – it must be run on a 386 or greater processor because it requires 32-bit addressing.  It emulates 16-bit for those legacy apps the needed it.  DOS was used, as in Netware, as a launching platform for the ‘kernel’ (though not in anyway as complex).  The downside to Win95 was the obvious leverage on some DOS functions, and complete lack of any security and a very lackluster separation of program to program corruption.   If you want more info – see here.  http://www.webdevelopersjournal.com/archive/win95.html   I remember Greg from the ‘Chicago’ (code name for Win95) beta days, and thought he wrote an article or two.   Hope this helps.   Rick Kingslan  MCSE, MCSA, MCT, CISSP Microsoft MVP: Windows Server / Directory Services Windows Server / Rights Management Windows Security (Affiliate) Associate Expert Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone WebLog - www.msmvps.com/willhack4food     From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carerros, Charles Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 4:18 PM To: 'ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org'; Send - AD mailing list Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet   My vote is that Win 95 required DOS and therefore was a frontend DOS application and not a true OS.  A good example, watch a Win 95 box boot, it always starts out with DOS and then DOS runs the interface, WIN 95.   Gnome isn't and OS its simply a shell, DOS is the same thing. -----Original Message----- From: Dean Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 4:01 PM To: Send - AD mailing list Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet 32 bit cooperatively multitasked if memory serves ...but it might not ;) -- Dean Wells MSEtechnology * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://msetechnology.com     From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan DeStefano Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 4:54 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet Could anyone settle a bet for me? I would like to know if Windows 95 was a 16 or 32-bit OS. One of us is saying that it was natively 32-bit, but ran 16-bit apps in a VM, while the other one is saying the reverse: it was a 16-bit OS that was capable of running 32-bit apps in a VM.   Also, one person is saying that W95 required DOS (like Win3.1.1) and the other is saying that, while built on DOS, DOS was not required and the OS went above and beyond its DOS roots.   If anyone can settle these issues and offer proof like links to Web pages and such, we would be grateful.   _________________________   Daniel DeStefano PC Support Specialist   IAG Research 345 Park Avenue South, 12th Floor New York, NY 10010 T. 212.871.5262 F. 212.871.5300   www.iagr.net Measuring Ad Effectiveness on Television   The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be privileged and is intended for the exclusive use of the above named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are expressly prohibited from copying, distributing, disseminating, or in any other way using any of the information contained within this communication. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by telephone 212.871.5262 or by response via e-mail.