Date:	Thu, 18 Sep 1997 00:56:53 RST
From:	ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru (-= ArkanoiD =-)
Reply-To:	ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru
Message-Id:	<370@mpak.convey.ru>
To:	rgawenda AT pobox DOT com, "Mike, A., Harris"@pool1.convey.ru,
	<mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
Cc:	"opendos AT delorie DOT com"@pool1.convey.ru, <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: CP/M web site looking for CP/M-86
Organization:	International Brownian Movement
Lines:	26
MIME-Version:	1.0

nuqneH,

In message <199709172352 DOT WAA16191 AT lince DOT las DOT es> "Rafa Gawenda" writes:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 1997 14:58:17 -0400 (EDT), Mike A. Harris wrote:
> 
> >> > Yes, it's better typying "for %%1 in *.* do type %1" (PC /MS DOS) than "type *.*" DR/Novell/Open DOS.
> >> > This is only one of the one hundred advantages of this "free" DOS.
> >> 
> >> I don't care. I never do. I type "cat *" on any of those.
> >
> >Heheheh.  Me too.  When you install 4DOS and some UNIX utilities
> >on ANY DOS version, the differences tend to be less important.
> 
> What are we talking about... Corel Draw of a DOS Operating System?!
> Install IBM PCDOS 7.0 and Caldera OpenDOS 7.01 and compare then.
> Both are more or less buggy, but one of them has more power builtin,

First,one of them is *much* more buggy. Second,the "power builtin" is 
questionable. Third,it _does not_ multitask.

> and IT multitasks. The other one... pff!

-- 
                                       _     _  _  _  _      _  _
   Must be a visit from the dead..     _| o |_ | | _|| |   / _||_|   |_ |_ |_
   CU in Hell ..........  Arkan#iD    |_  o  _||_| _||_| /   _|  | o |_||_||_|

- Raw text -