Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> * Mark Kent peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> I think his final claim is just wrong. A "thunk" layer springs to mind,
>> although I forget the details.
>
> Well, just what is "virtualization" anyway?
>
So far as I recall, DOS remained resident, and Win95 passed calls
through it. There was no virtualisation that I can recall. The DOS
window which Win95 presented was something else, which might be what
Timmy is referring to. Even in the virtualised PC environment which
Win95 presented in a DOS window, though, it wasn't fully virtualised -
you could easily crash the machine from there.
--
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
|
|
