Sender:	mlueck AT lueckdatasystems DOT com
Message-Id:	<200012241550.KAA23900@spdmraac.compuserve.com>
From:	"Michael Lueck" <mlueck AT lueckdatasystems DOT com>
To:	"opendos AT delorie DOT com" <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Date:	Sun, 24 Dec 2000 10:49:44 -0500
X-Mailer:	PMMail 2000 Professional (2.10.2010) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;1)
In-Reply-To:	<200012241453.eBOErs409664@eos.arc.nasa.gov>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: Dos future?
Reply-To:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 24 Dec 2000 06:53:54 -0800 (PST), Jim Stevenson wrote:

>HOw likely and soon should we have a Dos that works with fat32?

For simple stuff, MS DOS 7 (aka Win98SE) is not bad. I use that to image
Windows 2000 on FAT32. I actually would not call that task simple either. It
uses InfoZip32, CWSDPMI, DOSLFNBK, a 64MB RAM Drive from Europe to cache the
zip files from the server, another European RAM Drive came with a secondary
device driver to dummy drive letters so I can ensure the ramdrive is always H:,
etc... My next project is to build a small bootable Windows 2000 partition
based on the install disks to mount and access NTFS directly.

For running games and such, I have no idea how well MS DOS 7 works.

Michael Lueck
Lueck Data Systems
http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/

- Raw text -