From:	Tudor <tudor AT cam DOT org>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: What's all the hype about OpenDOS
Date:	Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:59:11 -0800
Organization:	Communications Accesibles Montreal
Lines:	18
Message-ID:	<32EEBCFF.6069@cam.org>
References:	<01bc0982$bf838fc0$ea038cd0 AT wahander> <19970127 DOT 100230 DOT 13783 DOT 2 DOT chambersb AT juno DOT com> <32ED69E0 DOT 2106 AT musc DOT edu>
Reply-To:	tudor AT cam DOT org
NNTP-Posting-Host:	dynppp-18.hip.cam.org
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Paul Brannan wrote:
> No kidding.  That's why it is not an end-user product.  And I think it
> could be.  Other Unices work out of the box, why can't Linux do
> that?
Other Unices also cost hundreds of dollars and demand lots of memory and
processing power.. 
> Yeah, you call that easy, but how much time does it take for you to find
> the right file?  I could probably go into Control Panel and change all
> that stuff on my own easily.  I could, if I wanted to, edit the registry
> or those .ini files.  But I don't want to.  Call me lazy if you wish,
> but I'll call it productivity.
How can you ask "Well how long would it take to find that file ..."
and after that state "I'd rather modify the registry .." ??
Modifying the registry by hand doesn't seem at all easier than modifying
a config file under UNIX ...
-- 
tudor 'at' cam 'dot' org
'This is Scott Nudds of the Borg. C is irrelevant.'

- Raw text -