Linked by David Adams on Sat 3rd Mar 2012 00:26 UTC
Permalink for comment 509637
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-10-24
Regarding win-9x hanging after 49 days:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/216641
This was an issue for win-95 and win-98FE (first edition aka standard edition). This kb article gives a fix for win-95/98. Win-98se did not need the fix because it did not have this problem.
Oh - as for the comment about 95 or 98 being "dos based" - that's an urban myth. The 9x/me line were full win32 OS's that put the CPU in protected 32-bit mode (something DOS doesn't do). 9x/me is *launched* or started / booted from DOS, but immediately puts the CPU into protected mode and wipes DOS from memory (or, more specifically, it creates a virtual environment for DOS so it can run as a virtual process that can be used by any legacy software that needs to run 16-bit code).
Win-9x/me itself will use 16-bit DOS functions if called for by any hardware drivers - but this is a "handicap" or deficiency of the driver not the OS. It was anticipated that during the transition from DOS and Win-3.x that Win-9x would have to be compatible with legacy 16-bit software - including drivers. Naturally this situation disappeared in a few years as all code became 32-bit.