starting in dos

[Roy]

tried f8 but it was not an option

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"Roy" > wrote in message
...
> tried f8 but it was not an option

You cannot start Windows XP in "DOS mode" that is only available on
operating system such as Windows 9x/Me.
You may use a command prompt from inside Windows (Start ... Run ... CMD)

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]


This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups

"Roy" > wrote in message
...
> tried f8 but it was not an option

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"Roy" > wrote in message
...
> tried f8 but it was not an option

You cannot start Windows XP in "DOS mode" that is only available on
operating system such as Windows 9x/Me.
You may use a command prompt from inside Windows (Start ... Run ... CMD)

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]


This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups

"Roy" > wrote in message
...
> tried f8 but it was not an option

[Nicholas]

Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot boot into it.

Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD , and hit enter.

--=20
Nicholas

-----------------------------------------------------------------

"Roy" > wrote in message: =20
...

| tried f8 but it was not an option

[Nicholas]

Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot boot into it.

Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD , and hit enter.

--=20
Nicholas

-----------------------------------------------------------------

"Roy" > wrote in message: =20
...

| tried f8 but it was not an option

[roy]

ummm...what is it based on?

>-----Original Message-----
>Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot
boot into it.
>
>Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD ,
and hit enter.
>
>--
>Nicholas
>
>---------------------------------------------------------
--------
>
>"Roy" > wrote in message:
...
>
>| tried f8 but it was not an option
>.
>

[roy]

ummm...what is it based on?

>-----Original Message-----
>Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot
boot into it.
>
>Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD ,
and hit enter.
>
>--
>Nicholas
>
>---------------------------------------------------------
--------
>
>"Roy" > wrote in message:
...
>
>| tried f8 but it was not an option
>.
>

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
systems.
(from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now Windows
XP (NT 5.1) )
It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
beneath it.

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups

"roy" > wrote in message
...
> ummm...what is it based on?
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot
> boot into it.
> >
> >Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD ,
> and hit enter.
> >
> >--
> >Nicholas
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> >
> >"Roy" > wrote in message:
> ...
> >
> >| tried f8 but it was not an option
> >.
> >

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
systems.
(from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now Windows
XP (NT 5.1) )
It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
beneath it.

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups

"roy" > wrote in message
...
> ummm...what is it based on?
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot
> boot into it.
> >
> >Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD ,
> and hit enter.
> >
> >--
> >Nicholas
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> >
> >"Roy" > wrote in message:
> ...
> >
> >| tried f8 but it was not an option
> >.
> >

[Spinner]

NT


"roy" > wrote in message
...
> ummm...what is it based on?
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot
> boot into it.
> >
> >Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD ,
> and hit enter.
> >
> >--
> >Nicholas
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> >
> >"Roy" > wrote in message:
> ...
> >
> >| tried f8 but it was not an option
> >.
> >

[Spinner]

NT


"roy" > wrote in message
...
> ummm...what is it based on?
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot
> boot into it.
> >
> >Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD ,
> and hit enter.
> >
> >--
> >Nicholas
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> >
> >"Roy" > wrote in message:
> ...
> >
> >| tried f8 but it was not an option
> >.
> >

[Jon]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message =

> You cannot start Windows XP in "DOS mode" that is only available on
> operating system such as Windows 9x/Me.

You can't start DOS in ME without a boot disk, 98 can restart into MSDOS =
if chosen during shutdown/restart.

Anyway, if XP/2000 are on FAT filing systems, using a bootdisk to use =
DOS on them works just fine. You can access files, and do alomost the =
same thing you can in real DOS mode.

[Jon]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message =

> You cannot start Windows XP in "DOS mode" that is only available on
> operating system such as Windows 9x/Me.

You can't start DOS in ME without a boot disk, 98 can restart into MSDOS =
if chosen during shutdown/restart.

Anyway, if XP/2000 are on FAT filing systems, using a bootdisk to use =
DOS on them works just fine. You can access files, and do alomost the =
same thing you can in real DOS mode.

[Jon]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message =
...
> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of =
operating
> systems.
> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now =
Windows
> XP (NT 5.1) )
> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> beneath it.

98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

[Jon]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message =
...
> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of =
operating
> systems.
> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now =
Windows
> XP (NT 5.1) )
> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> beneath it.

98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

[Ken Blake]

"Roy" > wrote in message
...

> tried f8 but it was not an option


That's correct. Windows XP, like all NT-based operating systems,
has no underlying DOS. You can not start it in DOS mode.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup

[Ken Blake]

"Roy" > wrote in message
...

> tried f8 but it was not an option


That's correct. Windows XP, like all NT-based operating systems,
has no underlying DOS. You can not start it in DOS mode.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

Never bothered with WinMe, but Win98 was a hybrid 16-bit/32-bit
OS. WinNT/2K/XP are _pure_ 32-bit GUI operating systems.

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
----
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in
message ...
> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of
operating
> systems.
> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
Windows
> XP (NT 5.1) )
> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS
support
> beneath it.

98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

Never bothered with WinMe, but Win98 was a hybrid 16-bit/32-bit
OS. WinNT/2K/XP are _pure_ 32-bit GUI operating systems.

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
----
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in
message ...
> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of
operating
> systems.
> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
Windows
> XP (NT 5.1) )
> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS
support
> beneath it.

98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
> systems.
> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
Windows
> XP (NT 5.1) )
> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> beneath it.

> 98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

No, The Windows 9x/Me operating systems are a hybrid that still has some
16-bit components and extensive 16-bit support.
The only true ("pure") native 32-bit Microsoft OS's are the NT family e.g.
pure 32-bit microkernel architecture etc etc etc.

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups

"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
> systems.
> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
Windows
> XP (NT 5.1) )
> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> beneath it.

98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
> systems.
> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
Windows
> XP (NT 5.1) )
> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> beneath it.

> 98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

No, The Windows 9x/Me operating systems are a hybrid that still has some
16-bit components and extensive 16-bit support.
The only true ("pure") native 32-bit Microsoft OS's are the NT family e.g.
pure 32-bit microkernel architecture etc etc etc.

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups

"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
> systems.
> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
Windows
> XP (NT 5.1) )
> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> beneath it.

98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> You cannot start Windows XP in "DOS mode" that is only available on
> operating system such as Windows 9x/Me.

> You can't start DOS in ME without a boot disk, 98 can restart into MSDOS
if chosen during shutdown/restart.

>Anyway, if XP/2000 are on FAT filing systems, using a bootdisk to use DOS
on them works just fine. You can >access files, and do alomost the same
thing you can in real DOS mode.

If you use a boot disk then you are not starting the original OS in any
mode - let alone DOS.
You are just starting the PC using a DOS OS on a floppy.


--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups

"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> You cannot start Windows XP in "DOS mode" that is only available on
> operating system such as Windows 9x/Me.

You can't start DOS in ME without a boot disk, 98 can restart into MSDOS if
chosen during shutdown/restart.

Anyway, if XP/2000 are on FAT filing systems, using a bootdisk to use DOS on
them works just fine. You can access files, and do alomost the same thing
you can in real DOS mode.

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> You cannot start Windows XP in "DOS mode" that is only available on
> operating system such as Windows 9x/Me.

> You can't start DOS in ME without a boot disk, 98 can restart into MSDOS
if chosen during shutdown/restart.

>Anyway, if XP/2000 are on FAT filing systems, using a bootdisk to use DOS
on them works just fine. You can >access files, and do alomost the same
thing you can in real DOS mode.

If you use a boot disk then you are not starting the original OS in any
mode - let alone DOS.
You are just starting the PC using a DOS OS on a floppy.


--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
Please use these newsgroups

"Jon" > wrote in message
...

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> You cannot start Windows XP in "DOS mode" that is only available on
> operating system such as Windows 9x/Me.

You can't start DOS in ME without a boot disk, 98 can restart into MSDOS if
chosen during shutdown/restart.

Anyway, if XP/2000 are on FAT filing systems, using a bootdisk to use DOS on
them works just fine. You can access files, and do alomost the same thing
you can in real DOS mode.

[Jon]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message =


> No, The Windows 9x/Me operating systems are a hybrid that still has =
some
> 16-bit components and extensive 16-bit support.
> The only true ("pure") native 32-bit Microsoft OS's are the NT family =
e.g.
> pure 32-bit microkernel architecture etc etc etc.
>=20
> --=20

Hi Mike,

I didn't say they were "true" 32 bit, just that they are real, since =
they can run 32 progs :-).

[Jon]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message =


> No, The Windows 9x/Me operating systems are a hybrid that still has =
some
> 16-bit components and extensive 16-bit support.
> The only true ("pure") native 32-bit Microsoft OS's are the NT family =
e.g.
> pure 32-bit microkernel architecture etc etc etc.
>=20
> --=20

Hi Mike,

I didn't say they were "true" 32 bit, just that they are real, since =
they can run 32 progs :-).

[Jon]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message =
...
> >Anyway, if XP/2000 are on FAT filing systems, using a bootdisk to use =
DOS
> on them works just fine. You can >access files, and do alomost the =
same
> thing you can in real DOS mode.
>=20
> If you use a boot disk then you are not starting the original OS in =
any
> mode - let alone DOS.
> You are just starting the PC using a DOS OS on a floppy.

That's what I said :-) (to use DOS with a boot disk, I didn't say go =
into MSDOS mode). And if the filing systems are FAT, then one can still =
access and arrange files around, etc.

[Jon]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message =
...
> >Anyway, if XP/2000 are on FAT filing systems, using a bootdisk to use =
DOS
> on them works just fine. You can >access files, and do alomost the =
same
> thing you can in real DOS mode.
>=20
> If you use a boot disk then you are not starting the original OS in =
any
> mode - let alone DOS.
> You are just starting the PC using a DOS OS on a floppy.

That's what I said :-) (to use DOS with a boot disk, I didn't say go =
into MSDOS mode). And if the filing systems are FAT, then one can still =
access and arrange files around, etc.

[JimC]

First you say XP is a "real" 32-bit O/S.
Later you describe XP as a "true ["pure"] native" 32-bit O/S.

Please explain how real, true, pure, and native differentiate XP from other
32-bit operating systems. Are there other 32-bit operating systems that are
imaginary, false, polluted, and alien?

Or did you mean that we can run XP in modes called real, true, pure, and
native? What function keys need to be depressed to start XP in these modes?
They all sound more appealing than DOS mode.

Why did you bracket pure? Is pure one of those features you get in retail
versions but not in OEM versions?

Jim

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> "Jon" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
> > systems.
> > (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
> Windows
> > XP (NT 5.1) )
> > It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> > beneath it.
>
> > 98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.
>
> No, The Windows 9x/Me operating systems are a hybrid that still has some
> 16-bit components and extensive 16-bit support.
> The only true ("pure") native 32-bit Microsoft OS's are the NT family e.g.
> pure 32-bit microkernel architecture etc etc etc.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Mike
> --
> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights
>
> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
> Please use these newsgroups
>
> "Jon" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
> > systems.
> > (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
> Windows
> > XP (NT 5.1) )
> > It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> > beneath it.
>
> 98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.
>
>

[JimC]

First you say XP is a "real" 32-bit O/S.
Later you describe XP as a "true ["pure"] native" 32-bit O/S.

Please explain how real, true, pure, and native differentiate XP from other
32-bit operating systems. Are there other 32-bit operating systems that are
imaginary, false, polluted, and alien?

Or did you mean that we can run XP in modes called real, true, pure, and
native? What function keys need to be depressed to start XP in these modes?
They all sound more appealing than DOS mode.

Why did you bracket pure? Is pure one of those features you get in retail
versions but not in OEM versions?

Jim

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> "Jon" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
> > systems.
> > (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
> Windows
> > XP (NT 5.1) )
> > It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> > beneath it.
>
> > 98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.
>
> No, The Windows 9x/Me operating systems are a hybrid that still has some
> 16-bit components and extensive 16-bit support.
> The only true ("pure") native 32-bit Microsoft OS's are the NT family e.g.
> pure 32-bit microkernel architecture etc etc etc.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Mike
> --
> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights
>
> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions.
> Please use these newsgroups
>
> "Jon" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
> > systems.
> > (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now
> Windows
> > XP (NT 5.1) )
> > It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
> > beneath it.
>
> 98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.
>
>

[Fred]

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 09:29:35 -0500, "Nicholas"
> wrote:

>Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot boot into it.
>
>Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD , and hit enter.

Actually ALL WINDOWS operating systems are based on MSDOS. However,
NT does not use DOS to load. There is quite a distinction between the
two statements.

[Fred]

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 12:10:07 -0400, "Jon" >
wrote:

>
>"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message ...
>> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
>> systems.
>> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now Windows
>> XP (NT 5.1) )
>> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
>> beneath it.
>
>98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

No they are not. All 9x OS's load from a 16bit sub kernel. In
addition, the way they handle memory and resources preclude them from
being called a true 32 bit OS.

NT was the first PC based Microsoft OS that was 32 bit.

[Fred]

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:04:15 -0500, "JimC" > wrote:

>First you say XP is a "real" 32-bit O/S.
>Later you describe XP as a "true ["pure"] native" 32-bit O/S.
>
>Please explain how real, true, pure, and native differentiate XP from other
>32-bit operating systems. Are there other 32-bit operating systems that are
>imaginary, false, polluted, and alien?
>
>Or did you mean that we can run XP in modes called real, true, pure, and
>native? What function keys need to be depressed to start XP in these modes?
>They all sound more appealing than DOS mode.
>
>Why did you bracket pure? Is pure one of those features you get in retail
>versions but not in OEM versions?
>
>Jim

All non-NT operating systems start in another mode to load a 32 bit
kernel. In addition, they manage resources differently. That is the
distinction. One can not state that 9x or ME were true, real or pure
or anything else, because they loaded a 16 bit kernel first, and
through a 4 part process they got to a simulated 32 bit OS. Even
then, accessing memory outside of a process was as easy as accessing
memory inside the process, which of course leads to significant issues
with stability. That is why 95 could run as long as 4 days before
crashing, 98 could run about a day, ME about 2 days. I have NT
systems that I reboot no sooner than 60 days, and W2K systems that
have been up for as long as half a year or more. XP will most likely
have similar performance.

[JimC]

Fred, you need about a semester of 18th Century English Literature.
--Jim

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:04:15 -0500, "JimC" > wrote:
>
> >First you say XP is a "real" 32-bit O/S.
> >Later you describe XP as a "true ["pure"] native" 32-bit O/S.
> >
> >Please explain how real, true, pure, and native differentiate XP from
other
> >32-bit operating systems. Are there other 32-bit operating systems that
are
> >imaginary, false, polluted, and alien?
> >
> >Or did you mean that we can run XP in modes called real, true, pure, and
> >native? What function keys need to be depressed to start XP in these
modes?
> >They all sound more appealing than DOS mode.
> >
> >Why did you bracket pure? Is pure one of those features you get in
retail
> >versions but not in OEM versions?
> >
> >Jim
>
> All non-NT operating systems start in another mode to load a 32 bit
> kernel. In addition, they manage resources differently. That is the
> distinction. One can not state that 9x or ME were true, real or pure
> or anything else, because they loaded a 16 bit kernel first, and
> through a 4 part process they got to a simulated 32 bit OS. Even
> then, accessing memory outside of a process was as easy as accessing
> memory inside the process, which of course leads to significant issues
> with stability. That is why 95 could run as long as 4 days before
> crashing, 98 could run about a day, ME about 2 days. I have NT
> systems that I reboot no sooner than 60 days, and W2K systems that
> have been up for as long as half a year or more. XP will most likely
> have similar performance.

[Fred]

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 09:29:35 -0500, "Nicholas"
> wrote:

>Windows XP is not based on MS-DOS, therefore you cannot boot into it.
>
>Use the MS-DOS emulator: Start > Run and type: CMD , and hit enter.

Actually ALL WINDOWS operating systems are based on MSDOS. However,
NT does not use DOS to load. There is quite a distinction between the
two statements.

[Fred]

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 12:10:07 -0400, "Jon" >
wrote:

>
>"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message ...
>> Windows XP is the next generation of the Windows NT family of operating
>> systems.
>> (from NT 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51 to 4.0 to Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) and now Windows
>> XP (NT 5.1) )
>> It is a real 32- bit OS.. It does not need to require any DOS support
>> beneath it.
>
>98/ME are real 32 bit OSes.

No they are not. All 9x OS's load from a 16bit sub kernel. In
addition, the way they handle memory and resources preclude them from
being called a true 32 bit OS.

NT was the first PC based Microsoft OS that was 32 bit.

[Fred]

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:04:15 -0500, "JimC" > wrote:

>First you say XP is a "real" 32-bit O/S.
>Later you describe XP as a "true ["pure"] native" 32-bit O/S.
>
>Please explain how real, true, pure, and native differentiate XP from other
>32-bit operating systems. Are there other 32-bit operating systems that are
>imaginary, false, polluted, and alien?
>
>Or did you mean that we can run XP in modes called real, true, pure, and
>native? What function keys need to be depressed to start XP in these modes?
>They all sound more appealing than DOS mode.
>
>Why did you bracket pure? Is pure one of those features you get in retail
>versions but not in OEM versions?
>
>Jim

All non-NT operating systems start in another mode to load a 32 bit
kernel. In addition, they manage resources differently. That is the
distinction. One can not state that 9x or ME were true, real or pure
or anything else, because they loaded a 16 bit kernel first, and
through a 4 part process they got to a simulated 32 bit OS. Even
then, accessing memory outside of a process was as easy as accessing
memory inside the process, which of course leads to significant issues
with stability. That is why 95 could run as long as 4 days before
crashing, 98 could run about a day, ME about 2 days. I have NT
systems that I reboot no sooner than 60 days, and W2K systems that
have been up for as long as half a year or more. XP will most likely
have similar performance.

[JimC]

Fred, you need about a semester of 18th Century English Literature.
--Jim

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:04:15 -0500, "JimC" > wrote:
>
> >First you say XP is a "real" 32-bit O/S.
> >Later you describe XP as a "true ["pure"] native" 32-bit O/S.
> >
> >Please explain how real, true, pure, and native differentiate XP from
other
> >32-bit operating systems. Are there other 32-bit operating systems that
are
> >imaginary, false, polluted, and alien?
> >
> >Or did you mean that we can run XP in modes called real, true, pure, and
> >native? What function keys need to be depressed to start XP in these
modes?
> >They all sound more appealing than DOS mode.
> >
> >Why did you bracket pure? Is pure one of those features you get in
retail
> >versions but not in OEM versions?
> >
> >Jim
>
> All non-NT operating systems start in another mode to load a 32 bit
> kernel. In addition, they manage resources differently. That is the
> distinction. One can not state that 9x or ME were true, real or pure
> or anything else, because they loaded a 16 bit kernel first, and
> through a 4 part process they got to a simulated 32 bit OS. Even
> then, accessing memory outside of a process was as easy as accessing
> memory inside the process, which of course leads to significant issues
> with stability. That is why 95 could run as long as 4 days before
> crashing, 98 could run about a day, ME about 2 days. I have NT
> systems that I reboot no sooner than 60 days, and W2K systems that
> have been up for as long as half a year or more. XP will most likely
> have similar performance.