From: MORRIS JP <jpmorris AT csm DOT uwe DOT ac DOT uk>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 13:48:39 GMT
Message-Id: <199703201348.NAA22447@milly>
To: opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Subject: Re: What good is GEM?

> From mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca Thu Mar 20 13:41:36 1997
> Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 01:21:06 -0500 (EST)
> From: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
> X-Sender: root AT capslock DOT com
> To: MORRIS JP <jpmorris AT csm DOT uwe DOT ac DOT uk>
> Cc: opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
> Subject: Re: What good is GEM?
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> 
> On Tue, 18 Mar 1997, MORRIS JP wrote:
> 
> > > and otherwise what advantage(s) does it provide?
> > > 
> > 
> > One of the things GEM is good at is files.It seems to use low-level FAT file
> > routines, and this permits it to remove wierd files, with spaces in their
> > names and so on.
> 
> Will this cause it to have problems running under DOSemu?

I have no idea.  I do not use linux or any filesystem other than FAT, so I
haven't seen what happens under these conditions.
 
> 
> I've never seen GEM so I'm highly curious as to wether or not I'd
> even benefit with it.  I'm running Linux with X, and just
> reinstalled WFW 3.11 again to use WP 6.1.  Right now this setup
> works pretty good (except the WFW part).  What benefit would I
> have of using GEM?  I suspect that I probably wouldn't use it,

None as yet, although its is suspected Caldera may use it as the basis of some
GUI os or shell.

> and that it would be aimed at people with much lower needs.  Is
> this assumption correct?
> 

Yes.  Although some people I know would be happy to see Gem again.

> 
> Mike A. Harris        |             http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
> Computer Consultant   |                  Coming soon: dynamic-IP-freedom...
> My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
> mailto:mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT  DOT on DOT ca
> 
>   Visit my homepage if you want your Dynamic IP address on your webpage.

???