Mail Archives: opendos/1997/04/07/02:10:35
On Fri, 4 Apr 1997, Matthias Paul wrote:
> >This is really getting ridiculous! Is this just a joke? If
> >serious, then I want a french version of "shutdown" so that I can
> >type "shutdown -r maintenant" instead of "shutdown -r now"
>
> Well, Mike, I think we *are* doing this seriously. If you want a
> localized version of DOS, with many command options translated
> to French or Italian, I would recommend you one of the older MS-DOS
> OEM releases from France or Italy. I have copies of Compaq DOS 5.0
> in my archives, were they actually did exactly what you described...
> ;-)
> And in the German version of Novell DOS, you can also find /HILFE
> instead of /HELP (luckily, these programs sense for /H only)...
>
> I am of your option when it comes to the translation of command
> line switches, since IMHO, translation in this area causes major
> compatibility problems. Also, I would not like to see horrible
> translated technical acronyms in German language, if I am used to
> the English computer jargon. (Once upon a time, reading IBM PC
> Technical Documentation in German, I saw their German translations
> of rather short English terms, going over two lines a single
> word!!! Actually I would have liked to ROTFL if I would not
> have to had understand what they were talking about in my
> mother tongue...)
Ok, international support that doesn't interfere with
compatibility in any way, and doesn't make the STANDARD release
kernel much larger or slower is fine, but I don't really think
that EVERYTHING under the sun in every language/country need be
implemented on the computer as internationalization. Perhaps I
am wrong in thinking that, but I don't want to download a german
DOS program and then type: INSTALL, then hit "Y" for yes and have
it delete my hard disk because "Y" is "Destroy hard disk" in
German. Even though I'm being sarcastic, do you see my point?
> But I disagree in what you said in the further:
>
> >And I'd like a 100k driver to be present in the kernel to support
> >switching between 80 different languages too.
>
> Such a library must not be resident part of the kernel, but a file
> on the harddisk. All we'd need was a small and optional API (done in
> less than 1KB) to access this library. (BTW, MS-DOS COMMAND.COM /MSG
> actually loads a resident message server, that cannot be found in
> DR DOS, Novell DOS, nor OpenDOS.)
Again, I was being cynical here. An *OPTIONAL* international
version of the OS with that API would be fine. I wouldn't want
my version bloated though.
> >Then we could implement 10000000000000000 new environment variables
> >to make batch files "compatible" with the old "silly" method.
>
> Environment variables were initially meant to describe the current
> environment, that was exactly what we were doing. But when speaking
> of variables like %YesChar%, I meant system functions as
> %Day_Of_Week%, that would not cost a sole byte of resident code,
> since they were part of the transient code of COMMAND.COM.
> Easy to implement, no compatibility problems, no wastage of resources.
Fine, as long as the OS isn't bloated by it, and it is optional,
I'm for anything that anyone thinks would be a great add-on.
> 4DOS is nice example of the usability of all these variables and
> functions, but even 4DOS was originally designed for the US market,
> and still lacks in many international issues. Even their way to
> introduce international features with v5.5+ was designed for the
> US market, and causes many new problems. (If you like to have a
> look at same examples of such bad design in 4DOS, have a look at
> 4DOS5TIPS.TXT/BATTIPS.TXT from MPDOSTIP.ZIP.)
http://???.???.??/????????/?????/????.ZIP
> When I described the idea of international characters (there are much
> more issues in this area, not only such characters), I don't spoke of
> structures holding the complete strings like "YesChar=J", but a small
> structure that contains all these characters and other magic bits
> (e.g. start and end date of summer time, that is daylight saving,
> more detailed time, date, currency, list formats, etc.). Fully
> featured, this could be done in less than 200 Bytes resident code.
Yes, some of those things would be nice, but are they really
necessary? I ask because I have never had any problem using a
computer because I am Canadian and speak English. If the problem
is really that big of a deal, then I apologize due to not knowing
many foreign computer users. I've got a Danish friend (who lives
here) who wants the 3 extra danish characters on his keyboard,
and I set it up for him, but IMHO, the TSR's that had to be
loaded consumed WAY TOO MUCH UMB memory and caused WAY TOO MANY
problems to make those 3 characters worthwhile. Perhaps I am
being close-minded, I don't know. I see English as the universal
language, and it is quite visible on the internet. Very rarely
do I stumble across any foreign discussions on the net, perhaps
this is because I'm not looking though. :o)
> >Don't forget the ARABIC version, that way they don't need to turn
> >the monitor upside down.
>
> Well, we have it in our hands, if OpenDOS is the beginning of a new
> area for DOS (or whatsoever will be created out of it), or just
> for the last collection of die-hard DOS-users (and only a 'DOS
> compatibility box' under Linux)...
>
> I think, most of us are in here, since we want to put OpenDOS on
> its way in the same direction, as Linux started several years ago.
>
[SNIP]
Yes, I agree that OpenDOS must go into a different direction and
that it probably will end up becoming a large OS that caters to
everyone's particular needs. I think that it is important that
it does so. However, the default plain jane version - to be
successful can't be cluttered with too many things for people to
configure before using, it has to be more or less ready to go.
Also, it cant jump from a 50k footprint to a 200k kernel all of a
sudden either. It will be interesting to see what becomes of it
when the sources get the dust blown off them.
> the situation is much different. Computers are still a priviledge
> of the elite. Most of them were happy to own a computer at all, not
> to speak of what we call 'state-of-the-art-hardware'. For example,
> in Russia, home computers like the legacy Sinclair ZX81 are very wide
> spread. Fortunately since some years, this is changing rapidly, IMHO
> caused by the immense grow of the Internet. But concerning spread of
> PC computers, many countries are still 10 years in back, so DOS is
> very attractive there.
Well, I use the Cyrillic font, so I guess you could say I support
internationalization. :o) The ZX81? I think my wristwatch has
more computing power!
> Another problem of localization are input and output systems.
>
> Most people from the US and other English speaking countries
> do not/cannot realize, which problems people from foreign countries
> might have with the keyboard input and screen/printer output.
[SNIP]
Right, and I am from an English speaking country - so maybe that
is why I don't see the problem. I do hope that the SOLUTION to
the problem doesn't ruin the OS.
> So IMHO, if we think of internationalization (I18n) as of fixing a
> bug that has become a feature (e.g. MOVE <F>/<D> with English kernel,
> and MOVE <D>/<V> in the German release), or if we actually need
> a localized version of DOS, since we cannot effort other hard-/
> software or don't speak English, we have to do it...
Well, I hope that if I'm ever in Germany, using a German computer
running DOS, that if I do a "DIR /S" that it doesn't format the
poor guy's hard disk.
> Just my two Pfennig... ;-)
And mine, 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
Download OpenDOS, then: CDD C:\^DEL /ZS MSDOS.SYS IO.SYS \DOS\*.*
- Raw text -