Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/09/13/04:07:22
At 10:03 AM 12/09/1997 -0400, you wrote:
>> I think also that compatibility with windows 95 must be necessary
>> (run in the same hard disk). What about drivespace? I use it.
>
>I don't recall stating this as a goal. I, for one, don't give a whit
>about Win95 running. If that's what you want, run Win95 instead.
>Win95 doesn't support a case-sensitive file system, which would be the
>first thing I'd make incompatible if I were to rewrite DOS.
>
Ok. I have a question. If I partition my hard disk, it would be possible
to run this 32 bit DOS? I think it would be nice a small program located in
the boot record that let select from what partition startup the computer,
so selecting between Loose 95 and DOS32 (and others if they are available,
for example: Linux).
The problem I think is that it must be a program to resize de partitions,
so, when the 2nd partition no have more space, and I need to install a new
DOS32 api or a new Loose95 death api, could make the room necesary.
I think that if this thinks not get considered, (personally) I would not
use that DOS32. Because there are a lot of Loose 95 applications that I
need, my mather, my father and sister needs. It is inevitable, there is a
lot of people using Loose95, and they force me to use this OS. Also I think
that Loose 95 isnt too bad, is more bad the company (Micro$oft).
Some questions about this dream DOS32:
- For example, it can use a dynamic cache like Loose 95 and Linux?
- Disk operations would get faster because of the no needing to switch to
real mode?
- It will not get very huge or yes?
Saludos!
Ivan Baldo: baldo AT chasque DOT apc DOT org - http://www.chasque.apc.org/baldo
- Raw text -