Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmat89
Windows 2/x86, 3.0, 3.1, WWG, and Windows 9x were 32-bit operating systems (with exception of 2/286, obviously).
|
No, they were not! They did use some 32 bit drivers and needed a 386 to address memory. They all used DOS to load, all ran 16 bit code natively and much of Windows was still 16 bit. The Pentium pro had no simple way of switching back to 16 bit x86 mode from 386, so it ran like a pig on Win9x. The Pentium Pro with NT outperformed the Pentium II and was massively faster than Win9x on it*. The NT family was a true 32 bit os and the default console was 32 bit. The Win9x ONLY had a DOS console. NT was entirely 32 bit and if an application was 16 bit it translated 16 bit WIN API to 32 bit calls and ran application code other than WinAPI on NTVDM, a virtual Machine. Hence the Alpha, MIPS and Power PC needed their version of 32 bit applications but could run some Win9x applications that were purely 16 bit, and DOS applications.
Win9x ran 16 bit Win API calls natively and ran DOS applications natively. It had the OPTIONAL Win32s that win 3.x had, built-in with a few extra APIs which is why Win NT 3.50 to NT 3.51 upgrade when Win95 came out was free.
Office 95 was still mostly 16 bit and would not run on NT3.5 or the Win3.x + Win32s, because they added a few extra API calls. Hence NT 3.51.
Win9x and Win ME were no more an OS or 32 bits than Win3.1 + 32 bit drivers + 32 bit TCP/IP + Win32S (all options on Win 3.1 / WFWG 3.1).
MS even released an Explorer Desktop for NT 3.51 as a tech preview after Win95 and before NT4.0.
If Win9x had been a real OS and also entirely 32 bit there would have been no need to develop NT3.5x to NT 4.0 -> Win 2K (NT 5.0) -> XP (NT 5.1). Server 2003 was was maybe NT 5.2. Vista and Win7 where actually NT5.x versions.
(* I installed NT4.0 Enterprise Cluster on a pair of Pentium Pros for 450 NT 4.0 workstations, which I also set up with the help of a team and MS -SMS in about 1998 or 1999)