On 2001-01-08 [EMAIL PROTECTED] <Heimo Claasen> said:
>*** Given the good "conviviality" of Linux with DOS, there's quite a
>bright outlook for a reasonable "division of labour" - both in
>technical terms and in functionalities of use - for a broad
>coverage of any "DOS + Linux mix"; and:
This is exactly the "mix" with which I experimented about one year ago,
and back then (and now) my conclusion was that Linux was wonderful for
networking and its DOS-friendliness. A year ago, when I spoke to the
IS folk at my place of employment (a hospital), they thought I was
"radical" to suggest using Linux (as apposed to UNIX or Windows NT) as
a cheaper, stabler alternative in a "mission-critical" medical
environment. Today, they've begun implementing Linux in a few areas
of the hospital: a sleep therapy lab, and more importantly, the
pharmacy's system is working from a Linux server. I'm confident that,
after they experience fewer and fewer crashes, they'll gradually
integrate it in other areas of importance. The IS folks were actually
pleased to tell me that Linux is now gaining a foothold... what a
difference from last year! ;-)
>*** Precisely because Linux tends to be "heavy" (both on ressources
>use and use effort, even if the latter will be more easy by and by),
>DOS will remain a sure value for all text (and numerical), "easier"
>tasks, including quick-start (text-based) net applications.
Exactly my view last year. As a matter of fact, my next "experiment"
in DOS involves my use of the venerable old TRS-80 Model 100 (now
*18* years old!), which utilizes BASIC and DOS via switchable ROM
chips. This machine can only focus on simple BASIC programming and
text applications on an 8x40 character LCD screen -- but for field
work with note taking, it's sufficient for my studies in efficiency
and simplicity. I'll return to my study of Linux later...
>-- Sure this is heavily biased too, as I'm usy with making
>precisely my own "mix" of that kind, <bg>. --
Thank you for revealing this OS usage study, Heimo. I'm delighted to
see that CLI-based OSes are still alive and well! ;-)
All of this points to the value and usefulness of SURVPCs as tools of
learning -- and even as examples of resourcefulness and efficiency.
Jerry [o:--] "The" IBM AT/5170 model 339 [--^~---] 9600kbps/30M HD
*1986 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| [ =====_] 512k RAM - 8MHz
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
