Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: True?  (Read 9234 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LoadWB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 2901
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
Re: True?
« on: March 03, 2011, 02:53:20 PM »
Quote from: Colin_Camper;619264
I don't normally get proved wrong quite so quickly!
It pays to read the whole thread!


I proved you wrong in less than one post in another thread.  Statistically, in the posts I have seen from you -- two at this point -- you are 100% likely to quickly jump on the offense.  I await more.
 

Offline LoadWB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 2901
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
Re: True?
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2011, 06:13:57 PM »
Quote from: Colin_Camper;619314
Oh yeah! You're the guy that thinks that Win95 didn't run atop of DOS 7!

You proved me wrong, eh? I don't think so. The only thing proved is that you have an inflated ego and an ignorance of Microsoft OS.
Hint: MBR>>MSDOS.SYS>>IO.SYS are the first three objects touched during a Win95 boot.

My triple-boot system used lilo to boot Windows (and Linux and Solaris.)  So, given your logic, Windows runs on top of Linux.  Sorry, go browse through MSDN and Technet sometime, and also read some of Mark Russinovich's excellent articles on the architecture of Windows.  Of particular relevance to our debate are the articles pre-Windows 2000 (which, by the way, was NOT the combination of the 9x and NT kernels: that was XP.)

Being sure of one's self does not equate to inflated ego.  I am simply right.  And this has now become off-topic and I will not continue here.