Date:	Mon, 21 Feb 2000 07:06:27 +0500 (MVT)
From:	Prashant TR <prashant_tr AT yahoo DOT com>
X-Sender:	prashant_tr AT midpec DOT com
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Win 2000 & Djgpp
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000220112819.25009d-100000@is>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.10.10002210702030.877-100000@midpec.com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 20 Feb 2000, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> Care to reveal the secrets of making such a good design?  How do you
> make a design that lets 16-bit real-mode code that accesses hardware
> on the lowest level, 16-bit protected-mode code, and 32-bit
> protected-mode code peacefully coexist?
> 
> Some technical problems are so hard that no good design can solve them.
> It doesn't help a discussion to claim that the problem happens because
> those who were charged with solving it are a bunch of ignorant morons
> who didn't learn what software design is.

And if MS really disabled apps from using h/w directly, I bet nobody would
go for Windows. But Win NT is much more stable than Win 9x. That should
give someone a clear idea that Win 9x is intentionally made _unstable_ for
compatibility with old programs (especially DOS programs).

And I'm sure everyone out here would be exteremely annoyed if they found
that their programs no longer work under Windows because they disabled
diret h/w access. Considering all this, Win 9x is indeed quite stable
although not completely.

- Raw text -