Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 22nd May 2002 04:45 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes Some days ago we hosted a head to head review of Bochs, VMWare Workstation and VirtualPC. I received a number of emails asking why I haven't included Netraverse's Win4Lin in the article. The main reason was because Win4Lin is not an emulator in the "traditional" sense of the word; neither it runs under Windows XP, where our previous test were conducted. In fact, Win4Lin can only run Dos and Win9x/ME, under Linux. We got hold of the brand new version of Win4Lin, version 4.0, and here is our review accompanied by some screenshots we grabbed for you.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
SPEED: You are funny :)
by ddj on Mon 27th May 2002 22:23 UTC

Removal of a pine tree air freshener will not stop a car from working, neither will it stop a taxi from working. You are comparing apples and oranges. Just remove some typical MS-DOS files from your Windows 9x and ME installation and ... whoops ! Quod erat demonstrandum. Fallacy? I think not. And why on Earth should I admit "my failure" ? ;) You maybe, but not me or Antarius. ;)

Antarius has already proved anything there is to prove. Just reproduce the simple experiment he mentions. If Windows 9x is supposedly not based on a form of "DOS" which is clearly sitting underneath it, how come that removal or tampering with of those parts can kill your 9x installation (we are not discussing Windows NT, which indeed is not DOS based!) ? How come that you can move those files around onto another machine and suddenly get a Windows 9x without GUI ? How come that you can indeed install a full MS-DOS ontop of Windows 9x (it is possible !!!) ? If it is not based on DOS (e.g. like Windows NT, 2000 and XP), how else is this possible ? Truth is, that Windows 9x are nothing but a form of MS-DOS 7 plus Windows 4.x, it does not matter what your so called "experts", Microsoft or you claim.

We have eyes, an open mind and we can see what we see. And some of us are engineers you know, so the chance that we might fall into your "air freshener trap" analogy is rather unrealistic. I find it insulting that you think of us as being that daft. We are not.

Speed, although I admire your stubborness on this point, but I find this discussion rather unproductive, as we are not even discussing about a real OS here. As much as I would enjoy a flame-war about the shortcomings of Windows NT, 2000 and XP and Microsoft products in general (those are at least worth a discussion), I am not going to waste my time discussing the truths about a 8-bit OS with 16-bit extensions and a so called "32-bit" GUI with someone who is unable to see simple facts that anyone with a Windows 9x installation can simply reproduce. And besides, there are tousands of detailed publications and articles out there that clearly prove you wrong. LOL.

Peace be with you, from whichever alternate dimension or galaxy you are from ;)

- dj.