Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19990126151144.1a4fb236@shadow.net>
X-Sender: ralphgpr AT shadow DOT net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (16)
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 15:11:44
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
From: Ralph Proctor <ralphgpr AT shadow DOT net>
Subject: Re: Some Systems Defined
Cc: dj AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <199901261649.LAA18855@envy.delorie.com>
References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 16 DOT 19990126113745 DOT 1fe79d02 AT shadow DOT net>
 <3 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 16 DOT 19990126113745 DOT 1fe79d02 AT shadow DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

At 11:49 AM 1/26/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
>> DOS is an independent operating system.
>
>I think if you mean raw dos, you should specify something like MS-DOS
>6.22 or OpenDOS 7.01 (with or without the version number).  Me, I
>consider "DOS" to mean all real dos versions and all emulations,

DJ: Yes.

Oh, of course, I meant OpenDOS, which I have had in my 386 for a couple of
years
and works nicely, also any other version system like DOS that stands alone
--DR DOS
and so on and that you can run programs written for MS-DOS on. My favorite now
is PC DOS 7.0 which I bought from IBM.

>including things like Win95's dos box and Linux's DOSEMU.  DJGPP is a
>"dos compiler" but that includes all types of dos, emulated or
>otherwise.

I don't think DOSEMU is a operating system, is it?. I thought it was a
utility to
compile programs that will be compatible with DOS--am I wrong on this?
I had it installed with Linux for a time, but did not use it. I took out Linux
because I need a bigger hard drive so that I can have everything I need
all at once.

DOSEMU is the main reason I would always have to have DOS in addtion to
a Linux system because I want to program with DJGPP without having to
use it--I'd rather not use an emulator for that purpose.

Yes, DJGPP is a DOS compiler. I love it. I put in my system list because
with DOS, DJGPP, BASH and EMACS I have everything I would have with
Linux excepting the interfaces.

The main thing that stands out in my mind is that Windows 95 is an
independent operating system intended to replace and if possible
make DOS obsolete. In some ways it is not an improvement over
DOS or Linux or OpenDOS or a number of very good systems we
have at our disposal--I hope this will sound like an understatement.

I look to Linux not to replace DOS and DJGPP but to replace Windows 95
97, 98, and so on. I believe the future of independent programming lies
with DOS, DJGPP and Linux. I would rather have all three on my machine.

Of course, if one is going to program for Windows 95, then the choice is
obvious. I'm sorry, I have to say one more thing. A machine dominated by
Windows 95 is an "office machine" -- fine, nothing wrong with that.