>> In what way would FreeDOS differ from Linux 2.4 then?
>> Apart from being worse in performance, multitasking,
>> having no GUI, no way to show several apps at once...

> it won't need an eternity to boot or reboot ...

Reboots are rare when you can hibernate instead :-)
But DOS boots so fast that hibernate is not even needed.

> it won't need huge resources to work at all ...

How huge is huge? A friend ran a 2.2 Linux on 14-32 MB
long time, what is a normal amount of RAM modern cool
DOS apps will consume?

> it won't try to see "everything" as files ...

The file / char dev / block dev interface of DOS
is not super duper elegant either, so what is wrong?

> it has a way better "DOSEmu" :-))

Because it runs faster and full screen but only once?

> it won't have zillions of apps which are not really usable...

Let me guess, your mouse is broken so you need DOS? ;-)

PS: What does all that tell us about compressed FS...?


This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
Freedos-user mailing list

Reply via email to