BeerCheeze
Rated XXX
|
 Posted: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 15:11:17 Post Subject: |
 |
|
| Blue|Fusion wrote: | And the NT kernel is still branched off of the 95 kernel.
And what does Windows being around before Linux have to do with anything? And I'm not even trying to be so much pro-Linux here....just anti-Vista because I am extremely fed up with the hype Vista is recieving whereas it offers only a few realistic advances over XP. |
Dude... you need to spend more time researching stuff. NT is not a branch of 95. Not even close.
| Quote: | Windows NT 3.1, 94-03-01 is Microsoft's platform of choice for high-end systems. It is intended for use in network servers, workstations and software development machines; it will not replace Windows for DOS. While Windows NT's user interface is very similar to that of Windows 3.1, it is based on an entirely new operating system kernel.
Windows NT 3.5, 94-04-12 provides OLE 2.0, improved performance and reduced memory requirements. It was released in September 1994. Windows NT 3.5 Workstation replaces Windows NT 3.1, while Windows NT 3.5 Server replaces the Windows NT 3.1 Advanced Server.
Windows NT 4.0, ("Cairo") 94-03-15 Microsoft's project for object-oriented Windows, and a successor to the "Daytona" release of Windows NT. |
| Quote: | | Windows 95, released in August of 1995. A 32-bit system providing full pre-emptive multitasking, advanced file systems, threading, networking and more. Includes MS-DOS 7.0, but takes over from DOS completely after starting. Also includes a completely revised user interface. |
The Windows NT line was built completely different than the Windows line. Windows NT is closer to OS/2 than Windows 1.x/2.x/3.x/95/98. Windows NT is the entire OS, while 95/98 are actually built on top of "DOS" . With NT you NEVER boot to "DOS" vs Win 9x you started in DOS, then the GUI took over. These are two completely different architectures, and the core of the kernel is not even close to the same. |
|
