> > You would get more something like dosbox than something like dos ;-) > Is this argument meant serious? Hopefully not, because it is "not very > convincing". Why should a protected-mode FAT driver make DOS change to a "DOS > emulator"?
I read some of such arguments in the past (not from you, Eric :-). Like "this wouldn't be DOS anymore..." or "then it would be like Linux...." or "I only want to have a MS-DOS replacement" etc. I like the idea of a modern OS called DOS. I am using all of new software/drivers which are available. If FreeDOS 1.1 or 2.0 will not include an "enhanced configuration" I will think of an own distribution. DOS stands for me: compatiblity of old and new software, modular design, possibility of 16-Bit, 32-Bit, real and protected mode. And of a very very fast and small operating system. Bye -- It is true that no one can essentially cultivate exact science without understanding the mathematics of that science. But we are not to suppose that the calculations and equations that mathematicians find so useful constitute the whole of mathematics. The calculus is but a part of mathematics. (James Clerk Maxwell) Using Arachne, the GPL Web Browser/Suite ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
