[lug] Real Operating Systems

[D. Stimits]

Peter Hutnick wrote:

 > D. Stimits said:
 >
 > >John E. Koontz wrote:
 >
 >
 > >>What about the GUI shell-oid?   Does it have a name and version
 > >>numbers different from the putative kernel?   Has anyone managed to
 > >>substitute a different shell for use with the kernel?
 > >
 > >My limited understanding of this (YMMV) is that the gui is integrated
 > >with the kernel, they cannot be separated.
 >
 >
 > False.  Windows 3.x was sold as a DOS add on.  Win9x ran on top of DOS,


I'm speaking strictly in terms of the newest flavors, including NT, 
Win2k, and so on. 3.x is way beyond the past of the stone ages, of 
course it is different. Just try to remove the look and feel of any of 
the more current flavors without touching the kernel, you can't do it. 
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?

D. Stimits, stimits AT attbi DOT com