Interesting

Post #143,554

2/26/04 8:29:57 PM

Interesting

3.1 -> 95 might have been the biggest leap of all in terms of architecture. Windows OS/2 - er - NT was simple in comparison as a solution to the 16->32 jump.

-drl

Post #143,563

by imric

2/26/04 10:05:49 PM

What 16->32 bit jump?

You mean 'thunking'?

That's more of a hop.

3.1 -> NT (with nothing in between) would have been a jump...

Imric's Tips for Living

Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.

Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.

Post #143,568

by Another Scott

2/26/04 10:33:02 PM

I think he means these old threads...

[link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=114268|#114268] and [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=114446|#114446] and similar.

Cheers,
Scott.

Post #143,570

by deSitter

2/26/04 10:38:07 PM

Re: What 16->32 bit jump?

Well like OS/2, NT could relegate all 16bit code to a DOS box and be done with it - unfortunately a lot of old code would not run this way because NT's DOS box was brain-dead. Almost all old code would run on Windows 95, it was really an amazing compromise effort. It sucked in an absolute sense next to OS/2, but given the goal of allowing a snap upgrade to 3.1 it was a great success - in the 95b release.

-drl

Welcome to IWETHEY!