Sam wrote:
> It has too large a footprint and too great an appetite for memory. For
> this reason there are many DOS apps that simply will not run under WIN95
> DOS. Compare COMMAND.COM for WIN95 DOS: 93,812 bytes, as opposed to
> COMMAND.COM for DR-DOS 7.02: 66,657 bytes.
"Size matters not". The size of the file on disk is useless to compare
with since very little of it is loaded in memory. Please remember that
MS-DOS 7.x has more features than DR-DOS 7.x (so far anyway).
> The COPY command under WIN95 DOS will not overwrite by default. You have
> to either respond to a prompt or use a parameter to suppress the prompt.
> This is a hassle, IMNSHO.
set copycmd=/y IIRC. This is a very good change that M$ did (but it came
in 6.x or even 5.x).
> WIN95 DOS lacks some necessary utilities, such as the UNDELETE command.
That can be found on the install CD (in the oldmsdos directory).
> Upon booting, WIN95 DOS loads a GUI by default. You have to either respond
> to some prompts or resort to a hassle and read some manuals in order to
> figure out how to fix this behavior. This is a very poor design feature,
> IMNSHO. Whether to automatically load a GUI upon booting is something that
> ought to be called or commented out in AUTOEXEC.BAT, as it is in the normal
> versions of Windows (3.x). I don't know why the developers of WIN95 wanted
> to complicate the booting procedure.
Why would you want to do that (complicate the booting procedure) for the
Windows users? Remember that MS-DOS 7.x is designed for Win9x.
> If you have WIN95 installed on a 100 MB partition on your C: drive, and you
> boot to a floppy being a DOS 3.30 system disk, then your DOS will not
> recognize the C: drive because DOS 3.30 cannot recognize a partition greater
> than 32 MB
That problem is there if you have this scenario:
FAT16 partition and try to access it with old MS-DOS versions (pre 4.x
IIRC).
That it was done with Win9x doesn't matter at all.
//Bernie
http://bernie.arachne.cz/
