> > errata: DOS in not just a bootloader (LILO or GRUB is a bootloader). But > > it's not the foundation under Win98 either. It's somewhere between the > > two. > > > Yeah, Win98 is not running under DOS and neither is DOS just a bootloader. I > agree it's somewhere in between. MS did that to shorten the development > cycle of Win95 for sure, reusing the codes they have with DOS compromising > the stability of the OS. That's why they remove DOS as part of the boot up > in WinNT kernel OS. > > Regards/ > Jerome > > > _ > Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org. > ph > To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to ph-l > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Now wait a minute. I was told a long time ago that win9x and brothers were made to keep the win32 alive. It was a compromise. When microsoft launched NT, it looked like its was not going to survive because the majority of pc's at the time cannot run NT efficiently. Most were running 3.1. So to ensure the survival of NT which used the Win32 api, they built win95. Now we can see both products merging with the introduction of more powerful processors. Eventually there will be no DOS compatibility at all. That has always been microsofts plan. It is also their downfall. They are too tied down to the ia32 paltform. We will not beat microsoft now. That will happen when ia32 loses dominance. They are scrambling now to make sure that ia32 will dominate for a damn long time. until they are ready for ia64 and other 64 bit platforms. Microsoft is a giant. It is slow when moving to other platforms. _ Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
