NA>
  >                                                        I've designed
  > one (in some detail) that needs *gigabytes* of RAM just to *start*.
  > (4Gb is the basic config; not much more is needed for apps though
  > 'cos it's all componented)
NA>
  4Gb of core ?  What hardware does this operating system run on ?
NA>
  > Bloat. I'd agree with you there; but much of it is down to inefficiency
  > of compilers. Look at Windows 2: 1Mb required. Then they went to C, and
  > disk space requirements shot up to 20Mb in Windows 3. There wasn't *that*
  > much new functionality.
NA>
  AFAIAA a lot if not all of the kernel of Windows 3.x (i.e.  KERNEL,
  USER, GDI) is written in assembly language.
NA>
  > Exactly. Some people do go a little bit far in OS-bashing. Win95 may be
  > a badly-designed kludge, but it's not Satan. What is silly is that so
  > many people are using it despite it's flaws. Many of them just don't know
  > that any better possibilities exist. (And, well, can you say 'installed
  > software base'? Bloody annoying, too.)
NA>
  Although I agree with much of the sentiment, I should remind you that
  this is the OS2DOS echo, where we discuss DOS and DOS+Windows
  applications running on OS/2, and all other aspects of VDMs and VMBs
  (including the Windows kernel and how it is supported in OS/2).  If this
  thread is going to get into detailed operating system comparisons, I
  suggest that you move it to the OS-DEBATE echo, where it will be on
  topic.
 > JdeBP -- Moderator, International FIDONET (and RBBS) OS2DOS echo <
___
 X MegaMail 2.10 #0:
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------