Bob George wrote:
>
> "Day Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > But what I refer to, (and oh how I wish english was less
> > ambiguous. 'it depends on what the meaning of is, is.')
> > is dos users, who have some idea of file and directory
> > structure, file attributes, and scroll bar menu systems
> > like MC, scripts/batch...
>
> MC DOES exist for Linux, per the reference I provided. And scripts and batch
> capabilities of course.
I've got something called 'MC' that came with every distro
I've seen. I like the two panel showing the source and destination.
But DC.COM had F6 to tag every file in a directory. Or if I
tagged a few, F5 to switch the tagged with the un tagged. or
F7 to clear tags. F2 deletes tagged files, F3 moves them to
the destination, and F8 swaps the source and destination.
It also shows me the date and size of the file. Another, more
recent file manager, 'directory freedom' or DF.com lets me
build macros, calls up a file editor, or executes an executable
insteadda requiring me to go to the dos command line.
I think there is more functionality missing in MC, but it dont
cometa mind right now, and- there may be more that MC can do that
I dont know about, but again, the documentation with DF is several
times bigger than that of MC.
Typical with dos tools and apps is that you create a directory,
add it to the path, and park it there... where the documentation
to use the tool is also put. I grant you that Nix will find the
documentation for anything it runs, but it can take a lot longer
than my own brain can to call up which directory has which app
and to look at the .doc file right there. Typically as well,
when I do that, instead of 'info', I open the dos doc with an
editor, and toss out all the crap I dont care about, just leaving
that bit that I think I might need later.
Sometimes, I do indeed delete something I need later; but that's
what I got the ZIP directory for. retrieve the archive, extract
the orginal version of the documentation. I dont havta wade thru
all the garbage I dont care about in INFO every time I wanna look
something up. I dont dare touch INFO cause I dunno where it is,
or where backup copies might be.
On the one hand, I feel a professional duty to keep track of what
Nix is doing, but if I had NETSCAPE that ran on DOS, I personally
would not need nix at all. If Netscape people had half a brain,
they would produce a version that ran on dos. They could sell the
CD for 5 or 10$ complete with the DOS OS right on it, and know
_exactly_ what the os was doing with their app. They could have a
surf tool that would _never_ crash. Virus proof. run on any damn
thing. Do it open source, and like nix, sell the _install_.
No multi-tasking? the users would never know the diff. It could
setup a ram disk and copy it, or any app there. dos stuff is so
compact that it will swap out from a RAM disk faster than NIX or
windoz can 'close the window' on one app and then open another.
>From the standpoint of the user, the NETSCAPE shell would look the
same, and most of them could care less what os is running it.
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
