>Oh, you are commenting on my "pieces of DOS" statement. I understand what you are saying...and I was inaccurate to use that wording.
>
>The only reason I used the word "pieces", is that I don't believe (and I could be completely wrong) that Windows fully depends on DOS services once it has booted up. For example, does Windows have its own code for file i/o, or does it depend upon DOS? IOW, does Win9x depend on the services of DOS to the same degree as Win3.x did?

For that part I really wouldn't know. Even though it has a full DOS under its butt, W9x surely has some fully blown 32-bit code (or else we wouldn't observe threading with Copy File); does it use pieces of DOS for compatibility with 16-bit apps or not, is beyond me. Or, is that DOS actually a 32-bit DOS? I have no idea, and, frankly, don't care. We've lived a few years with the W9x kludge (as can well be said of most of the MS OSes up to NT), and I'm glad it's over. The only reason I may ever again install w9x anywhere is that there are a bunch of cool games out there that don't work on W2k :)