Barry wrote:
>1) DOS7 supports FAT32 partitions. I don't believe that the non-MS DOS's
>do that, and certainly not DOS 6X.
This does not apply to the original Windows 95.
>3) I haven't tried it yet but it appears that if the BIOS supports
>booting from CD-ROM, then DOS 7 on the CD will boot. That's a 650 MB
>CD boot disk. Do any of the non-MS DOS's support LS or CD booting?
I haven't tried but according to what I've read booting from a CD is only
depending on the BIOS. However the OS must fit a certain requirment - don't
attempt to write to the boot drive. So you are free to choose any DOS,
Linux or OS/2 (although I'm uncertain about this one) version or any other
OS and put on the CD. What will not work are the following OS: Windows 95,
etc. since they want to write to certain files.
>So, does anyone have or know of test results to show that DOS 7 won't work
>as well as DOS 6 (speed, memory usage, etc) or is not compatible with
>programs that DOS 6 runs?
I've never heard of any problem. More likely if someone has had they
haven't tried with the same machine. "Pentium Pro"-machines (atleast
Pentium Pro/II/III/IV, Duron/Athlon) have problems with programs made with
Borland Pascal. So when I get time over I'm going to need to either
recompile all my Pascal programs in Free Pascal or rewrite them in C.
However this does NOT mean that it's unsafe or stupid to get a newer
machine. I haven't done any test yet to see exactly how much faster it is
but running the same HD/CPU intense programs on both this Duron 750MHz and
my old K6-2 400 points in the right direction. Even NASA has upgraded to
486's now, haven't they?
//Bernie
