Message-ID: <379D6498.1AD17AFA@home.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 03:49:45 -0400
From: Mark & Candice White <mhewii AT home DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: **MAKING OS**
References: <379939BC DOT 11DC1FDB AT home DOT com> <99072608244400 DOT 00586 AT dome DOT calderathin DOT com> <379C7F3C DOT 5FEFA3C2 AT americasm01 DOT nt DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Rolf Campbell wrote:

> Darren Noble wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, you wrote:
> > > * A tangent about win95 (not) being an os follows. *
> > >
> > > I agree that an environment hosted on, and using the services
> > > or, an other os is NOT an os itself.
> > > Win95 by this definition is NOT an os because it runs on DOS.
>
>     But, doesn't DOS use BIOS routines to read from the keyboard (when it could very
> easily hook the interrupt).  Doesn't it also use BIOS routines to do various tasks
> like changing screen-modes and reading/writing from a hard-drive?  Could it then be
> said that DOS isn't an OS because it calls BIOS service routines?
>
> --
>      -Rolf Campbell (39)3-6318

I have read some good arguments the MSDOS is not an os because it doesn't have
a kernel, but a PCs BIOS is not an os in anyone's book, its just a api/lib, it manages
no resources.

P.S. Did we ever answer the original question? What was it?

--
Mark & Candice White
System programming hobbyists.
http://members.home.net/mhewii/welcome.htm