From:	"Chris Jones" <cj7 AT ukc DOT ac DOT uk>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Win 2000 & Djgpp
Date:	Tue, 22 Feb 2000 16:29:49 -0000
Organization:	University of Kent at Canterbury
Lines:	16
Message-ID:	<88udgt$74r$1@spruce.ukc.ac.uk>
References:	<Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 10 DOT 10002210702030 DOT 877-100000 AT midpec DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	stue20c.ukc.ac.uk
X-Trace:	spruce.ukc.ac.uk 951236957 7323 129.12.226.12 (22 Feb 2000 16:29:17 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	news AT ukc DOT ac DOT uk
NNTP-Posting-Date:	22 Feb 2000 16:29:17 GMT
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Newsreader:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> 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).

That's fair enough, in that Win9x allows DOS programs more freedom, so they
are more likely to crash it. But what I can't understand is when Win32
programs crash Windows 9x completely - surely they are insulated much more
than DOS apps, and shouldn't be able to do any damage at all.

By the way, whatever happened to replying in threads - all the replies in
this thread are replying to the original post rather than to the relevant
post - it makes it quite hard to keep track of.

- Raw text -