Mail Archives: opendos/2004/01/10/03:48:19
shadow AT shadowgard DOT com wrote:
> > The main reason I subscribe to the OpenDOS
> > newsgroup is that, for me, the old DOS was both easy to learn and also
> > very *simple* to manage. One only has to play around with one of the
> > current flavours of UNIX/Linux for, say, twenty minutes, before one
> > realizes one isn't in Kansas anymore. UNIX makes some very simple things
> > a lot more complicated!
>
> Oh?
Linux is simple enough if you're satisfied with what the distro you have
offers. But trying to add or change anything can lead to endless threads
such as we see in the Linux lists. The unintended consequences are
considerably larger because Linux has so much more power.
> > I'm not a psychic, but if Gary Kildall was alive today, I suspect he'd
> > have taken our OpenDOS to new territories. Unfortunately, he is no
> > longer with us so we will have to imagine what kind of operating system
> > he would now be showing us (probably a hybrid of DOS, Netware,
> > DESQview/X, and EOS). As for computer languages, maybe we should follow
> > UNIX and simply standardize on plain C?
>
> C is a problem language. It tends to encourage
> certain *bad* programming practices. Like unchecked
> type casting.
I never cared for it either. In dos, anything you want to do has already
been written, and if not, you'll ed up using batch and/or assy to solve
the problem.
Why dont the print screen key work in Linux? cause it was designed by
and for system administrators, who dont need a hard copy nearly as often
as the home user, who has his printer next to him, whereas a network
printer can be anywhere on earth. Linux is terrific for business, with
very stable networks the users cannot screw up. But home users get
annoyed being told they dont have 'permission'.
- Raw text -