Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 15:03:22 09/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 25, 2003 at 17:03:13, Tim Foden wrote: >On September 25, 2003 at 13:16:30, Gregor Overney wrote: > >>This is not exactly an accurate description. I recommend reading the technical >>documents on AMD's web site. The statement >> >>"And Windows didn't become a pure >>32-bit OS until Microsoft launched XP in 2001." >> >>is just plain wrong. Windows NT 3.1 announced in March 1994. >> >>Gregor > >AFAIK XP lost the last remnant of DOS 16 bit compatibility (using the 16 bit DOS >subsystem). NT 3.1, NT 4, and Win2K all still had it. > >Also, I'm not sure whether you can run 16 bit windows progs on XP, but you sure >can on Win2K. > >I think this is what the article probably means. > >I agree though, that although this is probably what is meant, it is really >rubbish, and shouldn't have been said. :) > >Cheers, Tim. Read it again carefully, it is as clear as crystal water :-) http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,112603,00.asp
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.