Improving Windows 9X

[Nanaki]

I don't have time to read all the above (off to get WoW), but here's my two cents.

Win 1.0 and 2.0 were basically DOS with some more colours. Win 3.11 is also still DOS but added a shell around it. Win95 extended that shell to a great deal. It added more memory instructions but in the core, it's still DOS. It's not just backwards compatible, it IS DOS. Win98/SE/ME were all based on that same Win95C-core, so also DOS.

WinNT3 was -as you might know- the server OS, and introduced a whole new core to improve stabibility. It was BASED on DOS (in contrary to Win9X, who were DOS with a shell) and even used some characteristics of it. WinNT4 completly said goodbye to DOS, and introduced a fully non-DOS kernel. Win2k (WinNT 5.0) improved the stabibility of that core. WinXP (WinNT 5.1) added more backwards compability. Win2k3 (WinNT 5.2) added nothing new really.

EDIT= Does this discussion have any point?

Edited April 23, 2005 by Nanaki

[At0mic]

Another way to put it what be to say that Windows 95, 98 and ME are all a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit GUI, on an 8 bit OS written for a 4 bit architecture by a 2 bit company who can't stand 1 bit of competition

[RJARRRPCGP]

I don't have time to read all the above (off to get WoW), but here's my two cents.

Win 1.0 and 2.0 were basically DOS with some more colours. Win 3.11 is also still DOS but added a shell around it. Win95 extended that shell to a great deal. It added more memory instructions but in the core, it's still DOS. It's not just backwards compatible, it IS DOS. Win98/SE/ME were all based on that same Win95C-core, so also DOS.

WinNT3 was -as you might know- the server OS, and introduced a whole new core to improve stabibility. It was BASED on DOS (in contrary to Win9X, who were DOS with a shell) and even used some characteristics of it. WinNT4 completly said goodbye to DOS, and introduced a fully non-DOS kernel. Win2k (WinNT 5.0) improved the stabibility of that core. WinXP (WinNT 5.1) added more backwards compability. Win2k3 (WinNT 5.2) added nothing new really.

EDIT= Does this discussion have any point?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I dunno, but at least for Win32 applications, it probably uses VXDs instead of IO.SYS, which is for the most part just a boot loader!

Win32 probably uses VMM32.VXD for a majority of functions.

[jaclaz]

Win32 probably uses VMM32.VXD for a majority of functions.

Win32 is NOT Win9x/ME.

VMM32.VXD is present in win 9x/ME, not in NT/2K/XP.

It is an "assembly" of device drivers, it does not do anything but that.

Read here:

http://www.easydesksoftware.com/news/news10.htm

http://www.helpwithwindows.com/techfiles/vmm32.html

jaclaz

[iWindoze]

Thanks for the info, but I want to do all that I've explained before except that I want it on an unattended install. I don't want to install windows and then try to remove and update each component by last links.

By the way. Does anyone know how to make the boot disk for Windows 2000 SP4. My Windows is in Spanish.

I hope you can help.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry for raising the dead here, but I've been searching the forums for info

on a certain something and ran across this post, since I happen to know that

work has begun on something much like what was requested here's a few links:

soporific's Unattended and Updated Boot CD for Windows 98...

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=49892

Tihiy's Windows 9x Revolutions Pack....

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=39333

Hope this helps!