On 2000-09-01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] <Bob> said:
>I appreciate your sentiment, although I don't share the fond
>memories of the glory days of DOS (perhaps because I did support).
Actually, I came into the use of DOS in its last days (late eighties,
early nineties) and followed the majority of those who began to use
Windows. Now that I've returned to DOS, I've noticed that computing
is enjoyable again. For all the time I spent tweaking Windows and
figuring it out, I noticed after several years that it left me feeling
empty -- as though I was getting out of touch with my computer. If
anyone likes that sort of OS, they can have it -- just let them write
to me in *plain text*, and we'll get along! ;-)
>However, keep in mind that Linux is VERY well suited to
>low-resource, and embedded environments as well as the high end
>hardware. While its base requirements are a bit higher than DOS
>(ELKS notwithstanding), it certainly runs on lower end hardware
>quite well. And it does offer native, 32 bit multitasking on
>multiple platforms. (I won't get going on DOSemu again, I promise!
Still, DOS is less complicated, as far as my needs are concerned. I
spent about six months with Linux, wrote a forty page paper detailing
the commands that had meaning for me and have seldom returned to it.
I simply find it unnecessary for my purposes, although I'd surely not
discourage its use for those who've found it comfortable and useful.
>As far as the fluff: Better that it be run on Linux than simply
>yielding the consumer desktop to Microsoft again!
Certainly!
>I understand where you and Or are coming from. I just don't think
>that there's any benefit to limiting Linux's application simply to
>leave a niche for another OS. Linux isn't for everyone, and DOS
>certainly is well understood and has its place. I just hope the
>Linux community continues to look for ways to provide an Open
>Source alternative on ALL platforms, regardless of size, vintage or
>CPU family!
I'm for whatever makes plain, simple sense.
>My 2 cents worth. Good luck on your quest for the Perfect DOS!
IBM's PC DOS (all versions) have worked just fine for me.
Jerry [o - - ] IBM PC/AT 5170/enhanced [--^~---] 9600 kbps
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| [--===--] V.32/V.42bis
Net-Tamer V 1.11.2X - Registered
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
More info can be found at;
http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
