RE: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet

[Carerros, Charles]

My vote is that Win 95 required DOS and therefore was a frontend DOS application and not a true OS.  A good example, watch a Win 95 box boot, it always starts out with DOS and then DOS runs the interface, WIN 95.   Gnome isn't and OS its simply a shell, DOS is the same thing. -----Original Message----- From: Dean Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 4:01 PM To: Send - AD mailing list Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet 32 bit cooperatively multitasked if memory serves ...but it might not ;) -- Dean Wells MSEtechnology * Email: dwells@msetechnology.com http://msetechnology.com   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan DeStefano Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 4:54 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: [ActiveDir] Very OT: Please Settle a Bet Could anyone settle a bet for me? I would like to know if Windows 95 was a 16 or 32-bit OS. One of us is saying that it was natively 32-bit, but ran 16-bit apps in a VM, while the other one is saying the reverse: it was a 16-bit OS that was capable of running 32-bit apps in a VM.   Also, one person is saying that W95 required DOS (like Win3.1.1) and the other is saying that, while built on DOS, DOS was not required and the OS went above and beyond its DOS roots.   If anyone can settle these issues and offer proof like links to Web pages and such, we would be grateful.   _________________________   Daniel DeStefano PC Support Specialist   IAG Research 345 Park Avenue South, 12th Floor New York, NY 10010 T. 212.871.5262 F. 212.871.5300   www.iagr.net Measuring Ad Effectiveness on Television   The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be privileged and is intended for the exclusive use of the above named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are expressly prohibited from copying, distributing, disseminating, or in any other way using any of the information contained within this communication. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by telephone 212.871.5262 or by response via e-mail.