[lug] Real Operating Systems

[Peter Hutnick]

D. Stimits said:

>  > False.  Windows 3.x was sold as a DOS add on.  Win9x ran on top of

> The question seems to be about current versions of windows, not about
> DOS, which is almost an alien entity in comparison. MS is trying to dump
>  these old legacy systems...when was the last time someone you knew
> wanted to know how to change the look and feel of a windows 3.1 machine?

Uh, I'm pretty sure that MS is still shipping a DOS based OS through its
main retail channels.  I think it is whichever of XP and ME (I think it is
ME) that isn't "Based on NT technology."  (Which, of course, expands to
"Based on New Technology technology." Har.)

But, regardless of that, the GUI isn't in the NT kernel by any reasonable
definition.  Recently Slashdot linked to a story about MS working on a
command line only version of NT to better compete with Linux.  I doubt
that they have to do much more than add a console driver to the NT kernel
in order to do this.  (For reference Win2k can be started in a "command
line only" mode that loads the basic GUI with no shell and sticks a
maximized cmd window on it.)

-Peter