At 09:20 AM 1/11/2012, dmccunney wrote: >I ran DesqView, back in the day. It worked surprisingly well. >I recall one BBS sysop running four instances of a Wildcat BBS on a >25mhz AT under DV. He could have 4 nodes connected to four modems and >operating simultaneously on on machine.
It did indeed, we used it at a former employer, a CAD/CAM software company, to run "compiler servers"... > > And the name GUI means "Graphical User Interface". Basically handling > > common tasks by more visual means rather than having to use/type > > various and possibly long command line instructions. > >Yes, but I don't see why such a thing shouldn't exist for DOS. GUIs >took over the world for a reason. I don't say that a GUI for DOS in general is a bad thing,... And it is not that GUI's "took over the world", but nowadays every mouse jockey insists on using GUI based operating systems. And there is far more to any Windows, Mac OS X, Linux these days than just running a GUI on top of a command line based OS. And IMHO it just doesn't make sense to back port all that additional fluff, as you easily reach the limits of the underlying DOS in terms of available resources. And a lot of efforts that people are making/trying to make in order to push those limits or eliminate them just lead to changing (Free)DOS into another Linux distro. Ralf ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
