Mail Archives: opendos/1997/09/12/06:11:32
-= ArkanoiD =- wrote:
> Yep,i use it too but i can't call it "a _good_ vt100 emulation".
It works with the places I've tried. Although most real VT100s wouldn't,
in fact - the VT100 is very limited by modern standards (yes, I do have
one, a real DEC VT100).
> vt102 is my default console driver.
I use DVANSI most of the time, it's optimised for DesqView.
[PCDOS]
> It is (unlike OpenDOS) _really_ 100% compatible.
OK, that's a plus. In fact, it's an essential from my point of view,
one reason I never used DrDOS or Novell DOS was that I knew several
progams which wouldn't run under them properly.
> > Which other features does PCDOS have that I don't already have?
>
> Utility set that is much better than M$ - compressed filesystem (Stacker),
> disk defragmentation software (Central Point) other things like that..
MSDOS 6.22 has a compressed filesystem, which I deleted as soon as I could
- I have an intense dislike of those things. Too much RAM, too slow and
make recovering data near impossible.
It has DEFRAG, based on the Norton/Symantec defragmenter. Not very
configurable (it complains about 'unreadable' files but doesn't tell
you which ones or allow you to override it, for instance) but a lot
faster than the Norton one.
> Nope.. They made OS/2 for that.. but i don't like it.
It doesn't like one of my machines, and I haven't bothered putting it on
the other.
> > Why? I'm not trying to be contentious, I'm interested in what you see as
> > deficiencies in 6.22. I upgraded from 5.0, you see, and I saw it as an
> > upgrade.
>
> Hmm and what new features have you got? I just could not get the "upgrade"
> feeling..
Defrag, undelete and help, at least (and all of them dropped in DOS7,
at least as DOS utilities; there are some Win95/GUI versions of them).
Was 5 still using EDLIN, or did they have EDIT by then? I don't
remember quite what was in 5. Less base memory, certainly (although
on a machine with just base memory 3.3 was the last really usable
version), that was one of the selling points. Better SMARTDRV.
So why do you think 5 is better? Is it more stable in your experience?
> Hmm the talk on misc DOS versions and features is [indirectly] OpenDOS -
> related,am i wrong? If somebody here thinks it's offtopic we'll take it
> off the list..
OK...
Chris C
- Raw text -