At 01:59 PM 4/23/98 -0500, Chris wrote:
>
>Win3.1->win95 was really a ui change. Under Linux I can make this sort of
>change in 10 minutes (including compile), by changing wm's. Sure, more was
>32bit code, but it wasn't as huge as most people think (lots of fanfare
>instead).
>
Where did you get the idea that Win3.1 to Win95 was merely a UI change? If
you wrote Windows programs you'd know better and you probably wouldn't make
such a completely wrong statement. True, Win95 still uses too much 16-bit
code, but Win95 was much more than just a UI change from Windows 3.1.
With Win95, Windows developers got a pre-emptive multitasking OS with
threads, memory-mapped files, kernel level synchronization objects, pipes,
per-application message queues, a 4GB address space, structured exception
handling, long filenames, etc. Of course, WinNT does all this and more
and better, but Win95 was a major step up from Win3.1.
Now, if you had said that Win95->Win98 was really a UI change, you would
have been mostly correct. :-)
Al Margheim
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
