Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/09/10/06:21:12
On Fri, 10 Sep 1999 00:49:51 +0200, recktenw AT stud DOT uni-frankfurt DOT de wrote:
>Hi,
>
>In comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc Michael Kearns <michael AT toobie DOT demon DOT co DOT uk> wrote:
>
>> There's a lot of talk about how DOS is dead, how it's still valuable for
>> *old* PCs, etc.
>
>Unix is so extremely much better, you can run servers, apache, perl etc, the
>feel is like dos but so much more comfortable. Yes, its a little bit bigger,
>but what was once the old XT or 286 is now the old 486. Still have an old 286er,
>but I havent seen a 386er for years now.
I was trying to avoid the comparisons with other OSs, especially Unix (and
clones). Besides, you could run servers, apache, perl etc on any OS they're
ported to - that doesn't make it a 'better' OS, just more useful out of the
box.
And it's *not* DOS. That's all I'm interested in - enhancing DOS to bring it
up to date. I can already run Linux, Windows, BeOS, FreeBSD, OS/2 or
anything else if I want - I want to run DOS.
>And when I was asking for the future of Dos some weeks ago, I was more thinking
>about the future of this dear and noble newsgroup.
I'm sorry if this post seemed related to yours. Pure coincidence. This is
something I've been thinking about for a while, and decided to ask about on
these groups. It would seem (by the so far minimal response) that not many
people really care about DOS however, so the future doesn't look
particularly good in a commercial sense.
I will work on an enhanced version though, and use it. I believe that's my
perogative :o)
Regards,
Michael.
- Raw text -