Message-ID:	<000101bedc88$f66c2ca0$257336ce@sandrajo>
From:	"Christopher Nelson" <neverjaden AT yahoo DOT com>
To:	<djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
References:	<005701bed52b$51adb080$1d7336ce AT sandrajo> <99072312322800 DOT 00951 AT dome DOT calderathin DOT com> <379939BC DOT 11DC1FDB AT home DOT com> <008001bed623$77d379e0$1d7336ce AT sandrajo> <379B670D DOT 46A12675 AT home DOT com>
Subject:	Re: **MAKING OS**
Date:	Sat, 31 Jul 1999 09:18:14 -0600
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> > This is true and is not true.  The reason that Win95 spent so much time
> > using DOS-based drivers is that a lot of hardware used those drivers,
and
> > did NOT have drivers for Win95 yet.  Therefore, it had to fall back into
> > 16-bit mode and call the interrupt routines that had been loaded in DOS
> > mode.  That does not mean that Win95 is not an operating system.  What
it
> > means is that it was written to be able to host the DOS environment and
use
> > it's routines.  If you attempt to switch a program into 32-bit protected
> > mode without Win95's permission you will very soon find out who is boss
on
> > th system.

> I didn't say win95 was not a 32 bit executive but that it was not an os.
> I have done a fair share of low-level programming and was testing 'win95'
> sense before it was called such, I.E. Chicago.
>
> Oh and by the way didn't you know that MSDOS has been running in
> V86 mode sense  5.0.  How else do you think they freed up 640k low mem.

HIMEM.SYS and EMM386.exe

yes, obviously, i knew.  it's great that you had windows 9x before it was
windows 9x, that makes little difference.  the point is that windows 9x
performs all the things that is neccessary of an operating system AND allows
you to use stuff from a pervious operating system.  i call it compatibility.

    -={C}=-

- Raw text -