4 ms·
> I still remember sitting on my bed totally transfixed during the install when I moved from 95 to 98. For me, the key Windows 95 moment happened while I was
by mschaef 3y ago
> I still remember sitting on my bed totally transfixed during the install when I moved from 95 to 98.
For me, the key Windows 95 moment happened while I was sitting in an IBM lab working as a tester for OS/2 Lan Server. We had a copy of Windows 95 we were testing for compatibility.
Playing around one afternoon, we decided to try to break it. We started Drivespace compression, let it run for a while, and pulled the plug on the machine. Plugged it back in and it picked up right where it had left off...
- Unfrozen0688 3y agoAnd Windows 95 is DOS too, not NT. So less stable than NT
- mschaef 3y agoAgreed, although the relationship of DOS and Windows 95 is significantly stranger than that wording implies. DOS boots Windows 95, and legacy I/O can go through DOS, but DOS is also hosted by V86 machines to run DOS apps. I'm pretty sure it's possible for a DOS process running in a window to issue a file system request (a DOS API call) that gets trapped and processed by 32-bit VMM code and then immediately forwarded back to (a different instance of) DOS for handling by a legacy device driver. There are reasons for this. It's amazing it worked. I'm thankful it's gone.
- HeckFeck 3y agoNot quite. DOS was just the bootloader for Windows 9x. While Windows 95's kernel didn't have the full feature set of NT, it still was more sophisticated than DOS. Source: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/?p=24063 https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/?p=24063