Mail Archives: opendos/2001/01/05/04:48:35
Yes, happy new "everything", folks ... !
The "pessimistic" comments were indeed though-provoking. I guess
in part, they remind us of what to be wary of, in part however, how we
react to them is based on our culture and history. Those of us without
a history of autocratic rule, tend to think that these Orwellian outcomes
can't happen to us (in the same way as smokers don't think _they_
will get cancer - this only happens to other people, right?). However,
these things can easily "creep up" on us, so we have to be vigilant!
As for DOS, this can only have a future if it develops. Without the
prospect of such development (which in many areas is overdue!),
people will "walk away" from it and will cease to support it or
create/update applications for it, etc. (That said ... just how stable
and advanced is FreeDOS these days?)
The other important factor is the existence of credible applications
for DOS. There are key areas in which users need applications, the
lack of which will force them to use alternative O/S. For myself, there
are only two areas where I need to use Windoze - internet (however,
Arachne can now do most of what I need) and PDF/Acrobat file
viewing (Acrobat 1.0 doesn't support newer file formats and I cannot
get GhostView for DOS to do anything useful!). Other users will have
their own requirements - however, the number of such "key"
applications is probably not large (just the applications themselves
are ;-). Over time however, "natural selection" should concentrate
the efforts of developers into those applications which show the
most "promise" (and which have a suitable development model),
so that eventually these may have sufficient development support
to stay "up to date", even if the overall development community
may be smaller - well, at least let's hope so!
Joe.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthias Paul [SMTP:Matthias DOT Paul AT post DOT rwth-aachen DOT de]
> Sent: Friday, 5 January 2001 7:28
> To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
> Subject: Some thoughts at the beginning of a new year
>
> Hi all,
>
> First, I´d like to wish everyone listening to this forum a happy New Year.
>
> Given the long silence after my (rather pessimistic) "essay" in the past
> millenium, I am assuming that you either were shocked by my provocating
> statements or just by the fact how much the average consumers´ privacy is
> confined already - often even without their knowlegde and explicit consent
> (when speaking particularly of Internet users using Windows, default
> settings are just soooo convenient to leave them as they are: Ever
> wondered
> what this nice sounding "Control panel"->"Internet options"->"Extended
> properties"->"Enable profile assistant" actually does? Knowing the
> side-effects of the Internet search function in the toolbar, and
> web-based auto-link-completion?... ;-> Well, I know, most of you are
> experienced to avoid such issues, so this probably does not apply to
> you (we use DOS, don´t we?!? ;-), but I guess the sad story is the
> majority
> of PC users today has literally windows and gates (so to speak ;-) open to
> abuse, providing info to interested parties in the hidden "public" they
> would not even tell their neighbours...
>
> So, maybe there´s a slight hope, that the silence was because you all
> feel similary threated by the mentioned combination of closed-sourced
> technologies & sometimes strange ideologies, in a world which is moving
> faster every day, where short term issues count and only money seems to
> talk any more, and - even more important IMHO - that the consequences
> of using some of the key technologies are unfortunately no longer fully
> understood by most, probably due to lacking higher technical (and
> social???)
> education, paired with marketing controlled Zeitgeist ("fun generation")
> and
> simple minded or even blind belief in technology, and last but not least
> by
> intended obfuscation on the other side (with sometimes only marginally
> developed humanitarian conscience). Who takes the responsibility?
>
> But fortunately there are alternatives (there always are, if one takes
> the time to look for them). (Ironically, having said this, I´m
> "accidently"
> sitting on a Windows box with Outlook Express, once more my impression
> is: pretty at the first glance, but with no real substance. And, yes, I´m
> already close to ruining my eyes and getting sado-maso phantasies due
> to missing essential features and its many unergonomic design
> details... ;-> Know your enemy, it seems... ;->)
>
> We have Linux and GNU software, which is driven by alternatives and is
> evolving faster than ever thought, and we still have DOS, which is still
> powerful and - with the right tools in reach (like, to mention some of my
> personal favorits, the 4DOS command shell, the DOS Navigator file manager,
> the TSE & QEDIT editors, the EmTeX word processing/publishing system,
> the Arachne web browser, FreeKEYB keyboard driver & console extension) -
> convenient enough for many task, but, although far from being "dead",
> unfortunately is (and will be) more and more stagnating - until either the
> FreeDOS kernel will become much better than it already is, or the more or
> less complete sources of a commercial DOS like the technical superior
> DR-DOS would be opened up to let the community continue what was
> started 25 years ago and brought forward over the years by a group of
> brilliant developers (and some visionars) at Digital Research, Novell,
> Caldera, and other parties.
> However, the backbone of a community as we need it are many people who
> are willing to support such a project in every possible manner (not only
> in
> this forum) by providing expertise, infra-structure, time, good will and
> an
> open mind mixed with some sort of evangelism and the necessary
> persistence,
> and, yes, sometimes money (to grease the "interface" to the outer world
> ;-).
>
> Personally, I am seeing a possible DOS (and thereby DR-DOS) future in
> the following areas. Well, rather unsorted, but I´d still like to hear
> *your* estimation:
>
> - (for up to 10 years and longer) Low footprint and fast OS in many kind
> of
> x86-based embedded systems (especially if the kernel would be made
> even more configurable and modular - it currently requires 128 Kb
> to boot - and if the multitasker would get better real-time
> functionality.
> Also helpful would be improved serial communication support under
> TASKMGR.)
> - (for max. 5 years) Advanced file by file replacements for similar files
> and tools in other DOSes, Windows 9x, ME, NT, 2K, or OS/2 (way too
> many ideas to list here, but the approach is "best of all worlds")
> - Various kernel improvements (too much too list, but besides others these
> things are on my wish list to better support current systems: 64-bit
> LBA,
> FAT32, LFN support [a) native VFAT compatible plug-in *and* b) a
> loadable
> "transparent" virtual FS model to work seamless with other DOSes, e.g.
> using 4DOS DESCRIPT.ION files to store the info instead of polluting the
> directory entries], full DOS 7.10 API plus extensions, improved memory
> management. (Now, that Microsoft is finally dropping DOS, this also has
> something for good: 100% compatibility, which often prevented brighter
> solutions, is no longer the top issue. Once having laid a rock-solid
> base
> developing a DOS 7.10 compatible OS, we would be free to design and
> implement the final "DOS 9" according to our own wishes.)
> If the kernel should still be useable on *new* *desktop* hardware as a
> *native* OS in a few years, USB, Firewire etc. support will be required,
> as the traditional PC architecture is beginning to die out, no ISA
> slots,
> no DIN or PS/2 keyboards, no traditional I/O ports (gate A20), no serial
> &
> parallel ports, no traditional video hardware, no floppies. Even the
> CPU´s
> Real Mode might be going sooner or later. On such machines, DOS may
> continue to run only in emulated environments such as under DOSEMU,
> not as a native OS any more.
> (The kernel itself is relatively save because it has some sort of
> "hardware abstraction layer" (no virtualization, of course), but the
> memory managers and some of the disk tools would require massive
> changes, as they are often directly accessing hardware. Although a new
> "32-bit" DOS could be made compatible with existing software, the
> current
> situation does not justify such a effort IMHO. The alternative is
> running
> DOS under Linux, and Linux to be made much easier and flexible to
> configure and use.) However, there are (and will be) still myards of
> older systems using the traditional PC architecture, fast enough to
> fulfill their tasks, not to speak of embedded x86 boards, which will
> remain available for the long term.
> - (for max. 5 years due to the mentioned hardware changes ahead) "OS
> independent" boot floppy (e.g. things like Ontrack´s Easy Recovery,
> Storagesoft´s ImageCast, StarTools´ disk tools etc.) and recovery BIOS
> use (e.g. IBM´s DFT or new "dual-BIOS" features).
> - (at least for 10 to 15 years) Compatibility box under Linux
> This could evolve into some kind of general "Legacy Platform" for all
> kind
> of ancient software (including emulators for long forgotten systems of
> the
> "home computer" era) and important data files from the past three
> decades.
> (With multi-user support and some handy COMMAND.COM extensions
> for improved Unix support at the DOS prompt. Also interesting: Advanced
> NLS sub-system to provide limited Unicode support to DOS and bring in
> all
> the code pages found in other OSes, including the ISO, Windows, and Mac
> code pages.)
>
> Some of these paths may be commercially viable, others are definitely not,
> but would still be useful for convenience, flexibility, compatibility, or
> just to hold up the decreasing acceptance of DOS in the mainstream
> (every user counts). However, without publically available sources, all
> this
> is just wishful thinking (at least for DR-DOS).
>
> Let´s hope, this year will bring some changes, and things around
> DR-DOS will start moving again... (No need to be idle until than,
> help supporting FreeDOS and Linux meanwhile!!! This will indirectly
> also help DR-DOS.)
>
> In closing, I´d like to wish you all good default settings... ;->
>
> Matthias
>
> BTW. Without being able to promise anything because of the
> applying legal restrictions as well as obvious limited resources
> on my end of the wire, I would personally appreciate to receive
> all your detailed bug and problem reports regarding *any* issue
> of DR-DOS (for example, those you might once have sent to
> Caldera or Lineo), (realistic) feature and usability suggestions,
> etc...
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Matthias Paul, Ubierstrasse 28, D-50321 Bruehl, Germany
> <Matthias DOT Paul AT post DOT rwth-aachen DOT de> <mpaul AT drdos DOT org>
> http://www.rhrz.uni-bonn.de/~uzs180/mpdokeng.html
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
- Raw text -