From: ksinner AT solaria DOT sol DOT net (Kenton E. Sinner) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: 32bit DOS. Date: 17 Sep 1997 00:33:19 GMT Organization: Solaria Public Access UNIX - Milwaukee, WI Lines: 76 Message-ID: <874456398.792858@smyrno.sol.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: newsreaders.sol.net Cache-Post-Path: smyrno.sol.net!unknown AT solaria DOT sol DOT net To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Kevin A. Pieckiel (kapieckiel AT Harding DOT edu) wrote: > On Mon, 15 Sep 1997, Michael F Brenner wrote: > > (3) DOS does not have perfect multi-programming-ness, and needs help > There's where you're messed up. There is no such thing as a perfect > operating system or perfect this or perfect that. All this garbage about > a 32-bit DOS and pros and cons about it and other OS's..... people > (including myself) are spinning their wheels for nothing. A 32-bit DOS > will not solve the world's problems in computing. I don't want to solve the world's problems in computing, I just want to be able to use my familiar and resource-frugal DOS programs without having them tie up the machine (e.g. long downloads and printouts, lengthy compiles, etc.), and without having to buy a 2 gig hard drive and a new motherboard, and ... > If you want 32-bit > console apps, there are other 32-bit OS's out there to do it (*nix), and > if you want a 32-bit graphics application, there are pure 32-bit, fast > OS's that can handle that (my preference is WinNT--OS/2 just doesn't have > the support nor appeal to me, and Win95 is not pure 32-bit). None of these options can run very well on my current hardware. :-( > Even if you had a 32-bit DOS, you're just gonna find problems with that, > too. There's not a piece of software on this planet that is good enough > for anyone. It just has to be good enough for me, and I'll use it. > There's always something wrong with it. I hope neither DJ > nor anyone else DOES write a 32-bit DOS, as I'm certain it will not be > accepted in the market. Market schmarket. See previous paragraph. > There will be no support. MS is pushing to put > Windows NT on home desktop computers. This means that before long, people > can be self-suffient on pure NT/95 native, 32-bit code and DOS will be by > the wayside. It is my belief that 95 will also hit the ground and be > forgotten. Backwards compatibility with DOS will eventually be > nonexistent. In the longer future, hardware may do the same.... Who > knows, Intel may be able to one day push into the homes of people a > processor without the problems posed by the current Intel architecture. P7? We can only hope... > Or better yet, Intel will fall to its knees and be absorbed by Digital and > we will all have cheap alphas on our desks. I don't know. But it won't > be long before the software market has forgotten DOS. The average user > will one day not even have heard of DOS without reading a book on computer > history. People in the computer industry used to say, "By the year 2000 nobody will be running these programs anyway. So what do we need with more than 2-digit year variables?!" > Likewise (for now :-) -- Single, white, Milwaukee-area male seeks romance with non-smoking female. Are you caring, bright, humorous, sensuous, between 18 and 35 years old? I am a computer programmer in my mid thirties. Turn-ons: good food, pre-sputnik SF, roller coasters, fast computers. Turn-offs: taxes, internet regulation. Send email if interested. Hi, my name's Ken (Hi, Ken!), and I'm a programmer ... I can change ... if I have to ... I guess ... postmaster AT localhost postmaster@[127.0.0.1]