Granted I am not commenting on the exact post, too much  to locate it 
exactly.
still, speaking only for myself, I have continued to build upon and find 
dos solutions  without having to change operating systems for almost 30 
years now.  My choice  to think first about solutions instead of thinking I 
could not advance has yet to fail me.
I am surprised on a list dedicated to a Dos program  at how often I read 
people suggest going to use something else laughs.
I cannot speak to other  people's computing, but is not that why we 
call them personal computers in the first place?
Kare


On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Rugxulo wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, dmccunney <dennis.mccun...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner <sunbeam...@juno.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.
>>> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.
>>> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
>>> or it would shut down forever.
>>
>> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?
>
> Can't you use a RC (release candidate) for a few months? Or is that
> not supported any longer?
>
>>> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
>>> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.
>
> In fairness, Win7 doesn't have a lot of life left, so it's not a good
> long-term solution. (Vista very recently died, so no more updates or
> fixes.)
>
>> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
>> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
>> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
>> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
>> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
>> and better understand what your options are.
>
> I can't help but wonder if a simple Chromebook (from Best Buy, etc.)
> would fit the bill for him (or me or others). But without QEMU or
> similar by default, it's probably less useful. Google probably thinks
> emulation would be overkill for the "light" tasks that Chromebooks
> support. You can "probably" install a full Ubuntu (instead of default
> ChromeOS), but I'm not sure of the potential tradeoffs there (battery
> life?).
>
> A lot of issues with old DOS software have to do with printing, as one
> guy on BTTR recently mentioned needing. Not sure what is perfectly
> ideal here (VDosPlus??). BTW, QEMU 2.9.0 was just released today (but
> I'm unaware of any relevant changes for us).
>
> Another long shot would be DOS emulation in the browser via
> Javascript. Normally I would shun that for being too buggy or slow,
> but there are TONS of Javascript emulators. It's shocking actually,
> and some are amazingly good (and network-aware), e.g. OpenRISC. Of
> course, DOS is not high priority, and copy.sh's V86 is still too
> buggy, but we can dream, can't we?   ;-)
>
>> Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in *both* feet.
>
> Shooting your foot off? Yes, C++17 was finalized recently.   :-))
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Reply via email to