Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/05/08/12:02:08
On Mon, 8 May 2000 11:11:35 +0300 (IDT), Eli Zaretskii
<eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:
>On Sun, 7 May 2000, Kalum Somaratna wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 6 May 2000, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>
>> > So, if Microsoft would want to add this support to DOS, they'd need to
>> > rewrite the Windows file I/O code so that it would work inside DOS,
>> > and then add that code to MSDOS.DOS and IO.SYS.
>>
>> This shows just how well Micro$oft designs there software, right. ;-)
>
>Sorry, I don't really see how did you arrive at that conclusion.
>
>The addition of LFN functionality when Windows starts is analogous to
>the additional functionality in, say, keyboard remapping that you get
>on Unix when you start X. I fail to see how does this reveal anything
>(good or bad) about the design.
That LFN support is tied to having Windows resident in RAM.
That keyboard remapping is tied to having X resident in RAM.
Product tying is thought to be bad and to result in bloatware;
hence the *n?x philosophy of "one tool for one job".
--
Damian Yerrick
"I refuse to listen to those who refuse to listen to reason."
See the whole sig: http://www.rose-hulman.edu/~yerricde/sig.html
This is McAfee VirusScan. Add these two lines to your signature to
prevent the spread of signature viruses. http://www.mcafee.com/
- Raw text -