From: jeff@wa.msc.edu (Jeff Turner)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Tastes gross/more fattening (repost (last attempt only got ~1 site))
Keywords: (hex encoded ASCII) 3A 2D 29
Date: 7 Apr 92 20:11:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: uc.1992Apr7.201102.22110
Organization: Minnesota Supercomputer Center, Minneapolis, MN

I hesitate to even do this (because people should have more important things
to discuss), but what the heck.

In article <> 890139w@aucs.acadiau.ca (John Weatherbie) writes:

*>Any idiot who thinks that Windows is an operating system needs a kick to the
*>head.

Good thing I have a helmet on!

*>An operating system doesn't require another operating system to be installed
*>to work.

You are mistaken.  I have a number of examples that prove this, but I'll keep
to the ones that apply to PCs and IBMs.

Lets go back to the original cassette based IBM PCs.  Since they ran and were
able to do work, they must have had an operating system.  I'll admit, it was
a very simple one that consisted of little more than BASIC calling BIOS
routines, but it still was (and is) an operating system.

If BASIC wasn't good enough for you, then you could buy a floppy drive and DOS.
If at power-up BIOS detected a valid floppy in the drive, it would bootstrap
DOS, otherwise it would just run good old BASIC.

So, DOS is an add on system that allows more functionality that the basic
system provides without.  The computer runs just fine without it.  DOS is an
additional layer above the BIOS/hardware layer.

Now lets look at Windows.  Windows is started by DOS (which is similar to DOS
being started by BIOS).  After Windows is running, it takes over control of the
machine (just like DOS does from BIOS).  Windows still calls DOS to do some of
the lower level functions (just like DOS still calls BIOS), but with each
release Windows is doing more and bypassing DOS (and sometimes BIOS) completely.

In fact, Windows is becoming such an advanced operating system (creating 
multiple concurrently running virtual PC processes, managing memory, etc.)
that I think it is now more of an operating system than DOS is.

*>Does Windows do this, didn't the last time I checked.

As I said, something doesn't need to be self sufficient to be an operating
system.

Another example comes from IBM mainframes.

IBM presently offers (at least) 3 different OS's for their big machines.  
You have got MVS, AIX, and VM.  All three of which can run as the only
operating system on the machine, but they can also run under VM which creates
as many virtual machines to run MVS and AIX in as the user wants.  Under VM,
each job can even get its own virtual machine (and in fact it frequently does)!

So, just because an OS runs "underneath" another one doesn't means it is not
an OS.

*>Maybe it's in the manual, let me check.  Nope not there either, must be in a
*>txt file. Hmm don't see it.  Must not be able to do it. Guess it's not an
*>operating sytem, everyone hear that, IT IS NOT AN OPERATING SYSTEM!!.

Why not think of DOS as a fancy monitor program?  Then to boot Windows, you
simply enter the monitor command: "win".  No one has even said that operating
systems have to boot automatically (and if you wanter to, you could always put
it in your autoexec.bat file).

*>DOS is an operating system, OS/2 is a great operating system, Windows is a
*>program that runs under OS/2 and DOS.

Windows is just as much of a system for operating on the display card as DOS
is a system for operating on disk drives.

*>Get it right!!!

Please.

*>Buy OS/2 and forget the term UAE.

Maybe I am lucky, but since the time I bought my 8MB 386 (a year and a half
ago) and started running Windows 3, I have not had one UAE.  Maybe I just don't
push it to the limits like some people must.

*>john

-Jeff
-- 
---
Jeff Turner                           EMAIL: jeff@msc.edu
Minnesota Supercomputer Center, Inc.  VOICE: (612) 626-0544
Minneapolis, Minnesota  55415           FAX: (612) 624-6550
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms