>> >>Again, this was purely marketing, not technical, as MS wanted to >> >>exclusively bundle their DOS with Windows. With (very creaky) shims, >> >>DR-DOS was said to be able to boot Win95 (and proved such in court), >> > >> > Where and when was that? This lawsuit was never brought to trial in >> > the first place... >> >> I don't know all the details, barely any actually. > > So why keep spreading such rumors? :-\
Sources specified in the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DR-DOS : http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/1996865/cebit-caldera-windows-dr-dos-denying-ms-claims http://www.seattleweekly.com/1998-09-16/news/the-mouse-that-roared/ (second page) > Why do you think that back in the early days of Windows 95, the > "16bit thunking" was such a big deal? That wouldn't have been at all > necessary if Win32 and the old 16bit stuff weren't in effect two > discrete entities... Thunking is just API translation because of different pointer conventions and such. Arguably the existence and usage of Windows-4-style thunking between 32-bit and 16-bit components illustratively shows that Windows 4 is close to its Windows 3 roots. In x86 Windows NT, 16-bit subsystems known as NTVDM and WOW are enabled by default, but they seem to be separated more clearly from the main (32-bit) system. Regards, Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
