To:	MPAUL AT ibh DOT rwth-aachen DOT de
Cc:	opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
References:	<4BE7B5F84 AT ibh DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Message-Id:	<AAoSnDpW27@mpak.convey.ru>
Organization:	International Brownian Movement
From:	"-= ArkanoiD =-" <ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru>
Date:	Tue, 25 Mar 97 03:07:14 +0300
Subject:	Re: Interactive shells Re: 32bit BIOS
Lines:	55
MIME-Version:	1.0

nuqneH,

> From: "Matthias Paul" <MPAUL AT ibh DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
> Organization:  IBH, RWTH-Aachen
> To: opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
> Date:          Mon, 24 Mar 1997 21:40:09 GMT+0100
> Subject:       Re: Interactive shells Re: 32bit BIOS
>
[dd]
>
> > > This would be cool, though I'm already capable of doing so in Norton
> > > Comnmander 5.0.
> >
> > I don't think it would be cool..
>
> Why not?  What's so bad with the idea?  If you don't want it,
> just don't use it, and it won't cost you memory, speed, whatsoever...
>

I hope so. (it won't). I just don't want it to be mandatory - i am afraid
of that because NC 5.0 is big and ugly. And - being compared to other shells -
it *does* cost memory,speed,etc..

> I must admit, it would be slow if for maximum compatibility using
> we'd use the original 3rd party archivers, but, of course, we could
> write specialized programs for common archivers like ZIP/ARJ/RAR/LHA.

TGZ! Don't forget .tar.gz archives! It _is_ common archiver!

> These would be faster, since there was no a big overhead due to the
> permanent shelling/initializing of the external utilities.
>
> > and i don't like Norton Commander 5.0 - it
> > is huge,slow and stupid. Volcov Commander + ARCview is smaller,
> > faster and (imho) offers better interface.
>
> Hm, speaking of alternatives, what's about the DOS Navigator [DN]:
> It's small (compared to NC), similar speed compared to the NC, better
> link funktions, better archiver support, better editor, 4DOS support,
> open end flexiblity, much more...

Yep,i know many people who use it.. I prefer Volkov Commander for some
reasons - it is even smaller,faster and looks exactly as NC 3.0 i loved -
just a few necessary features added - whithout any interference with
user interface.. About DN.. i prefer to do must of that things via CLI.
So i do not use it but i understand well why people do.

..and about 4dos: msh and psh are *much* better for me,more powerful and
(somehow) unix-compatible.. btw does anyone here have a copy of
MKS toolkit for DOS? I'm afraid it's no longer supported but i'd like to
take a look on it..
--- 
                                       _     _  _  _  _      _  _
   Must be a visit from the dead..     _| o |_ | | _|| |   / _||_|   |_ |_ |_
   CU in Hell ..........  Arkan#iD    |_  o  _||_| _||_| /   _|  | o |_||_||_|

- Raw text -