ovehk at ping.uio.no
Thu Jul 26 15:54:48 CDT 2001
wine at schiebemasten.org (asasel) writes:
> aep at nospam writeme.com wrote in message news:<n300mtg9t1i79vicl9f1hpk6b0epts9gfc at 4ax.com>...
> > On 26 Jul 2001 02:58:05 -0700, wine at schiebemasten.org (asasel) wrote:
> > >Hi!
> > >
> > >I just hear you talking about programs like UT or winword, requiring either
> > >a 3D rendering engine or a million DLLs.
> > >But has anyone of you ever successfully started a plain DOS Program like
> > >MS edit.com or duke3d?
> > I could be wrong here, but from what I know, WINE enables you to run
> > Windows programs, it is not a PC/DOS emulator, in which case it will
> > have a hard time with DOS programs.
> > Andrew.
> Ok, anyone else?
> Maybe someone who does not think that windows is an operating system
> on its own?
Wine is mostly architected after Windows NT, which IS an operating system
on its own, and needs special subsystems to run DOS apps (and NT doesn't
do it very well either). When it comes to Windows 9x, a DOS app is still
virtualized away from the kernel using VDDs and VxDs. The kernel is a lot
of 16-bit code, but 16-bit *protected-mde* code, which is very different
from the 16-bit real-mode that DOS must use. If DOS wasn't abstracted
and virtualized in Win9x, you wouldn't ever be able to run more than one
DOS app at a time, and have them run simultaneously (multitask).
But you can, even in win3.x (you could not in win2.x I think), which
means that Windows handles DOS differently than you think.
More information about the wine-users