I was very angry as I realized years ago that WinME still contained the core libraries of Chicago
(krnl386,user.exe,vmm32.vxd,gdi.exe and all the VXD crap)

You can test HX its like a small Wine on DOS written in ASM running on an enhanced DPMI extender.All open source.Runs a lot of command line win32 tools but graphics code is not much there.

About WM:
Windows mobile is not really Windows its an improved CE 5.0 using a new GUI(didnt like the File Explorer)and new problems that vary between some build numbers .
I liked flashing newer modified builds from xda-developers that were more finger friendly.
Windows Phone has its own crappy code but uses a newer different CE 6 kernel that has no 32MB per
process memory limit.It looks similar to a ZuneHD ROM dump to me.

A few years ago I had the WP7 countering plan of getting CE 6 shared source compiling it and combining its kernel and all kernel mode files with the latest WM 6.5 files and a new memory saving and noob friendly UI.
Both my keyboard phones died because of flex cable problems.

I found this a while back (forget where), but I think it speaks for itself. Lol.

http://i.imgur.com/oJVAE.gif

(It's uploaded to imgur because the BA Image Uploader didn't want to animate the GIF.)

That gif is amazing.. ;D

Clearly demonstrates the insecure nature of 9X...

I doubt it's got anything to do with the kernel. It's how the OS was. If you design an NT based OS which has those same options, yes, you'll be able to do the same, AFAIK.

Though no doubt, NT *is* more secure.

Didn't say it has anything to do with the kernel. It's just the way 9X is made; no admin rights, direct hardware access, the procedure displayed in the GIF... It's all insecure. And I since someone complained about comparing two OSes from 10 years appart, I'd like to see someone do that in Windows NT 4.0 (assuming that's 95 in that GIF)...

NT4 perhaps not, but there was that Accessability trick in Vista/7 ...
Anyway, that could've been solved by simply redesigning the log on dialog box.

Then again, you've got MS-DOS mode in the Startup Options menu, what more could you ask xD

Well, if it were after me, I would've placed a logon prompt in MS-DOS too, like the Recovery Console does in NT5.x, otherwise its just too damn hilariously easy to gain access to the system.

Hm... I believe there was a multiuser kind of DOS back then. If they were serious about it, MS should've made MS-DOS 7 more secure from the get-go.

Point made.

I seem to remember a way to bypass logging in on Windows NT 4 if the screensaver was active. Of course, now I can't find it again.

No system is *perfectly* secure, just some more so than others.

I wonder if UAC could be ever implemented into 9x if it were continued.

See, 9x and NT are kernels, right? So if the OS built on it, is itself secure, I see nothing big that the kernel can do. Or if the OS is insecure, the kernel can't make it secure. Like if a lame OS is built on NT, which allows you to delete all system files, does it ever matter?

About the stability and BSoD part, yup, I know.

You could say that, though a more precise definition would be monolithic and hybrid kernels... If MS ported 9X to the NT kernel it wouldn't be 9X anymore, just another release of NT. If MS re-wrote 9X from scratch it would not be 9X anymore, but an entirely new system. Hence they abandoned it; there is no further development possible using that kernel and system design...

9x has no concept of users, privilege levels or access controls. NT separates this out at the most basic level.

Of course a kernel has everything to do with security. Sure, it's possible to take a secure kernel and undermine it by forcing it to grant everything maximum access, or you can take an insecure kernel and give it the illusion of security (WP7 is actually a very good example of this - the underlying kernel, Windows CE, has *no* security whatsoever, like 9x, but WP7 is incredibly tough to crack because it's implemented a very rigourous security model in the public-facing APIs), but ultimately, you should start as you mean to go on, and that requires a secure kernel. A significant chunk of the NT kernel is dedicated to ensuring security at the most basic level. I highly recommend one of the Inside Windows NT series books if you want to learn more.

Windows 98 is still my Fav OS. It's super cool. I still remember when Windows XP was released, everyone wanted it. I Installed it, used it for few days, and then i wanted to go back to Windows 98. Because it was simple to use, and it was fast. And it looks awesome. Windows 98 is still useable today in 2012 and even in 2013! If you want to use Modern Software, then just install KernelEx and you can even install Firefox 14. And all other new Versions. Windows 98 is awesome. I don't care what you say. Windows 98 even runs on my iPad/Galaxy SII per emulation and it's faaaast!

Wait what, this thread is still going?!

Locked...

Because you're a moderator!

Yeah, that seems logical. Thanks for the info.

I remember I hacked a Windows 98 SE I had, was that in 2002, or not, but the point is. You go to Scheduled Tasks and set explorer.exe to launch at System Startup. Then after you reboot you will see both the login prompt and the system account logged in at the same time.

OpenWatcom created once an interesting page in their wiki explaining why Win 3.x was very hacky and needed special compiler adaptions that OS/2 1.x did not.
Since Win9x is a bloated 3.x containing more 32-bit UI code and drivers someone telling all the implementation mistakes has to write a long article about it.

1. Its really old
2. Its EXTREMELY outdated
3. It couldnt support multiple cpus