Mail Archives: opendos/1997/03/21/02:48:04
On Thu, 20 Mar 1997, James Lefavour wrote:
> I believe what we need here IS two different OpenDOS products.
> OpenDOS 7.xx, when the bugs are gone, will be a superior DOS, for 16
> bit computers and up. It will be outstanding, but what about the
> newer Computers? 386's have been available for how many years?
> Therefore, we will develop OD-32, a full 32 bit OS, and for it to be
> viable, it must compete with guess who - which means compatibility,
> GUI, etc.
Absolutely. There is DEFINATELY a strong net interest in
developing a 32bit DOS.
> I do fully support "accessibility", and I don't appreciate a
> disrespectful individual "beating us about the head and shoulders"
> with a US regulation that doesn't apply here. OD is from Caldera,
Yes, I agree, this issue is like beating a dead horse. Nothing
more need be said about it.
> So we aren't just talking games here - there is useful software that
> is available only for the M$ Windoes environments. We will need to
> keep that in mind for the future - how about modelling after the
> XWindows setup - make the OS 32 bit command line, and have a GUI
> layer float over that?
Exactly! Couldn't say it better myself!
> Just my thoughts - I have been silent too long <g>
Well, thats exactly what we need. Everyone should voice their
wants/needs. If you stay quiet, then you can't expect your needs
to be met.
TTYL
Mike A. Harris | http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant | Coming soon: dynamic-IP-freedom...
My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
mailto:mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca
LINUX: Lost your video after running a game or DOSemu, email me for fix.
- Raw text -