Subj : Synchronet can maybe...?
To   : Time Warrior
From : Digital Man
Date : Tue Jul 19 2005 07:14 pm

  Re: Synchronet can maybe...?
  By: Time Warrior to Ralph Smole on Tue Jul 19 2005 05:39 pm

 >  >  >  >  >  >  > yup!  and windowsXP is just a copy of Dosshell running on 
 > 
 >  >  >  >  >  > Dos 7.0, actually <G>
 > 
 >  > Yeah, and my computer is actually running on top of an abacus which runs 
 >  > of 8 fingers,2 thumbs and 10 toes.
 > 
 > If you say so. However as i've already said... Dos 6.22 could not support
 > long filenames. Only 8.3 filenames. So Dos 7.0 was needed.
 > 
 > Seeing as you've proven you're not all too bright, heres some other details
 > to clarify my point:
 > 
 > http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000481.htm
 > http://www.ctyme.com/msdos7.htm
 > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-DOS
 > 
 > Windows 95 through ME needed Dos 7, Dos 8, etc... now some say the NT Kernel
 > isn't built on top of Dos and others say it is.

Anyone that says it is, is either an idiot or testing your gulibility.

 > No *real* way to prove it

Sure there is.

 > an
 > i'm sure it's not something M$ would be too quick to admit. However, if NT i
 > not loaded on top of DOS, then how come autoexec.bat and config.sys were not
 > removed, but instead, hidden in the Windows directory and changed to
 > autoexec.nt and config.nt? :-)

Oh my gawd, do you believe that the moon landing was faked too?

autoexec.nt and config.nt are there for when you run an NTVDM (NT Virtual DOS
Machine) session, they're used to setup the "Virtual DOS" environment for DOS
programs! If you don't ever run any DOS programs, you don't need those files.

Wow, you're just full of misinformation today!

                                                  digital man

Snapple "Real Fact" #177:
The first sailing boats were built in Egypt. 

.