On Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:57:29 -0500, Samuel W. Heywood wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jan 2002 14:13:54 -0600, "Rob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Sam; >> I just read your post and you are right about windoze reconfiguring >> these files on startup. I can't give you a very technical explanation >> Rob: > I have read that if you install DR-DOS on your computer before > installing some versions of Windows you will get a false error > message during the Windows installation process telling you something > to the effect that DR-DOS is a bad version of DOS and that it might > break your Windows. I didn't get any false error messages like that > when I installed Windows 95 after installing DR-DOS 7.03. Has anyone > here encountered such a false error message issued from Windows telling > you that DR-DOS is bad? > Sam Heywood Sam; I know that from some fairly recent litigation against micro$oft that m$ put programming in their win2x or 3.x and later packages to search and detect DOS other than m$dos, and if found, to give error messages of faulty or deficient DOS installed, when actually they would work just fine if this wasn't in there. This is alleged to be unfair business practice. Also thanx for the critique of DR-DOS 7.02 and 7.03, it even gave me a clue to another problem I'm having! Rob:
