On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:50 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Rugxulo wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
>>>
>>> Is FreeDOS HD access as slow as PC or MS DOS? IIUC, the latter use slow 16
>>> bit BIOS code, which is what makes it painful for me to us
On 2012/09/07 12:19 (GMT-0400) dmccunney composed:
> I'd be interested in what Felix is doing and where he sees visible slowness.
File saves in last known QPro DOS version (5.6 IIRC, it has no menu to
announce version that I recall), which I keep open constantly and use more
than all other soft
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:19 AM, dmccunney wrote:
>
> I'd be interested in what Felix is doing and where he sees visible slowness.
>
> As you mention, FreeDOS is 16 bit code. But how fast things will
> appear to be will have more to do with the hardware you are running on
> than whether the
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
> On 2012/09/07 12:19 (GMT-0400) dmccunney composed:
>
>> I'd be interested in what Felix is doing and where he sees visible slowness.
>
> File saves in last known QPro DOS version (5.6 IIRC, it has no menu to
> announce version that I recall
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:19 AM, dmccunney wrote:
>>
>> I'd be interested in what Felix is doing and where he sees visible slowness.
>>
>> As you mention, FreeDOS is 16 bit code. But how fast things will
>> appear to be will have more to do with t
> dmccunney writes:
[…]
> You can get a copy of the PC Mag archive with it and some other
> things here:
> ftp://ftp.sunet.se/pub/simtelnet/msdos/pcmag/v13n07.zip
I'd like to note that this archive could be accessed via the
HTTP protocol just as well, e. g.:
http://ftp
