Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 09:57:43 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: Ralph Proctor cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: Some Systems Defined In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.16.19990126113745.1fe79d02@shadow.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Ralph Proctor wrote: > DOS is an independent operating system. Right. > Windows 3.1 (and before) is a graphical user interface dependent upon DOS. Windows 3.X is also a protected-mode multi-tasker of DOS sessions (more accurately, virtual machines). > Windows 95 ++ is an independent operating system with added GUI features. > (Windows 95 ++ is NOT a GUI dependent upon DOS.) Not true. Windows 9X is not much different from Windows 3.X, it just includes a protected-mode replacement for most of DOS file-oriented functions. DOS still exists and is running on a Windows 9X machine, but it usually never sees any file-oriented calls. However, some functions, like SetPSP, are still passed to DOS. For details of this (exceedingly simplistic) description, see "Unauthorized Windows 95" by Andrew Schullman. > A BASH/EMACS/DGJPP/DOS installation is a simulation of a normal UNIX > operating system. Not true. DJGPP is mostly about applications, not about the OS. The DJGPP library does emulate some of the Unix system calls, but that's it. Experience shows that a user's perception of the OS is mostly created by the flavor of applications that users run every day, and you don't have to run on Unix to have Unix applications at your fingertips. > When I hit bash [Enter] then Emacs [Enter] > I enter a world much like Linux except I am still using DOS and don't have > the many fine features for multi-tasking, and on-line work that Linux has. You can have multi-tasking on Windows. A little-known fact is that Windows has been preemptively multitasking DOS applications since time immemoriam, definitely in 3.X and 9X.