On  1 Dec 98 at 13:20, Eric Johnson wrote:

> For a report that I have to give I need to discuss whether or not
> Windows 3.x is an operating system. I was wondering if any of you
> had opinions on the topic and where I might go to find more
> information (on the web). Thanks for any input.

  Please don't resurrect this pointless war of words here.  The
question was at the center of many flame-wars in the 1993-1995
timeframe.  You can probably still find some of this stuff via
www.dejanews.com.
  The brief answer is that Win 3.1 had many of the characteristics of
an operating system.  The dispute was whether these were sufficient
to make it one -- some said yea, some nay.

  And it wasn't really that anyone cared about the question per se.
Those arguing yea were typically defending a decision (not
necessarily theirs) to install and use it, while those arguing nay
often seemed to be trying to establish the technical superiority of
some less commercially successful alternative.  A clear answer either
way would leave a lot of people unhappy.

  If you really need to know what Win 3.1 did internally, and how,
you need to find a copy of "Windows Internals" by Matt Pietrek.
Published in 1995, so it might not still be in print.

David G

             Do you want to signoff PCSOFT or just change to
                    Digest mode - visit our web site:
                    http://nospin.com/pc/pcsoft.html