delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: opendos/2001/02/23/11:28:31

Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:26:17 -0500 (EST)
From: M Ross <p046715b AT pb DOT seflin DOT org>
Subject: Re: udma-100 and some thoughts about dos
To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <001501c09da2$b44d4700$0100007f@whitedragon>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.10102231122.A20511-0100000@pb.seflin.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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 Fri, 23 Feb 2001, White Dragon wrote:
> ...  It is useless to build faster controllers if
> internal mechs can't keep the pace. Obviously IMHO...

Obviously, generations of subsystems do not always keep pace with each
other.  But where does anyone draw the line?  And technology in computers
changes rapidly.  For the average user, upgrading often, to the latest,
solves nothing.  Does the system do as is required?  

The history of any open design, like the IBM PC, allows for hardware
subsystem change-outs that may not always be usable immediately.  Software
alone has a track record of lagging, surging, lagging.  But I prefer the
open design, to a closed design.  

Apple MacIntosh is the example of a relatively closed design.  While they
still have the graphics software interface that works best in my opinion,
they never seem to make a successful hardware system to support it.  Sales
of PC systems over Apple systems is the evidence I offer for my opinion. 

> Well, sadly i must agree that dos cannot strike and win against windows.
...
> So i asked why they keept trying under windoz while they surrended after two
> seconds under dos. Well, they said that clicking is not that difficult
> as writing text commands...

A lazy attitude those students have acquired, possibly due to a dumbing
down system; not much of a future I see.  Effective, efficient, reliable,
tight software is not written in high level languages.  It has always been
written in assembly language, or @ least something like "C".  Simple 
batch code in DOS is very simple to learn & use.  But it does require 
effort.  Have the game machine concepts worked against productivity?

> I belive that even linux without xwindows can beat Microcrap. Future will be
> lamer friendly...

Sales hype, marketing, can sell or destroy.  Especially in the consumer 
market.  Serious business has learned, is taking a second look, will more 
than likely return to solid software, probably some form of UNIX.  With 
or without graphical user interface.

The Best To You & Your's,
Ross ARR
ico p046715b AT pb DOT seflin DOT org

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019