Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeder.news-service.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: DOS Guy Newsgroups: alt.msdos,comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.os.msdos.misc Subject: What role does "DOS" play in Windows 95/98? Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:27:31 -0400 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 32 Message-ID: <4E9B5A53.392C9558@Guy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: cg1p0ww5LEZ/KK5J2U8QOA.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.os.msdos.programmer:282 comp.os.msdos.misc:138 To put it simply: Many people believe that Windows 95/98 runs "on top of" DOS. This would lead one to believe that there is some 32-bit, protected-mode DOS executive layer running under Windows 9x. If that was not true, then the alternative would have to be that a 16-bit, real-mode DOS layer is somehow able to support windows-9x running in 32-bit protected mode above it. Most rational explanations say that DOS is involved in two aspects of win-9x functionality: 1) the boot loader 2) to support legacy 16-bit applications (and drivers?). A more likely explanation is that: a) people like to denigrate the windows-9x line and fabricate differences between it and the NT line, and one way to do this is to make the outlandish claim that it runs "on top of DOS" - something that was true of windows 3. b) people genuinely do believe that windows-9x is more similar to windows 3 in terms of "running on top of" DOS. c) people associate FAT32 with DOS, and hence because windows-9x only supports FAT32 it therefore must have some large internal reliance on DOS. Please discuss here what the truth really is concerning where DOS fits into the structural functionality of Windows 9x.