Message-Id: <199703211452.JAA17573@keeper.albany.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <jamesl AT mail DOT albany DOT net>
From: "James Lefavour" <jamesl AT mail DOT albany DOT net>
To: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 09:49:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: [opendos] Wishlist v2.0 
Reply-to: jamesl AT albany DOT net
CC: opendos-developer AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
References: <199703201652 DOT LAA16522 AT keeper DOT albany DOT net>
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970321023515.16555g-100000@capslock.com>

Officially moved to Opendos-developer <g>

> On Thu, 20 Mar 1997, James Lefavour wrote:
> 
> > I believe what we need here IS two different OpenDOS products.  
[snip]
> > viable, it must compete with guess who - which means compatibility, 
> > GUI, etc.
> 
> Absolutely.  There is DEFINATELY a strong net interest in
> developing a 32bit DOS.

It will probably be a practically simultaneous venture - fixing and 
fine tuning the 16 bit OD, while developing the 32 bit 
implementation. I am sure that quite a few will get involved here.

> 
> > So we aren't just talking games here - there is useful software that 
> > is available only for the M$ Windoes environments. We will need to 
> > keep that in mind for the future - how about modelling after the 
> > XWindows setup - make the OS 32 bit command line, and have a GUI 
> > layer float over that?
> 
> Exactly!  Couldn't say it better myself!
> 
> Well, thats exactly what we need.  Everyone should voice their
> wants/needs.  If you stay quiet, then you can't expect your needs
> to be met.

Then, we need a rock solid 16 bit OS, which can be configured to 
behave very much like M$Dos (for those who would feel most 
comfortable with that) while surpassing it in functionality. Keep the 
size down, memory management up, and concentrate on 16-bit 
functionality.
Also, create a 32 bit system, which requires the higher processors, 
and work the bugs out of that. Make sure it stays DOS, in that it 
executes DOS exe's, but add a 32 bit GUI layer that will allow 
Win3.1/95 apps to run as well. Long, multi-dot filenames at the 
command line level, full protection between apps (strive for the 
Linux level of quality <g>) etc.
As soon as the source code becomes available, people can start 
talking about how to do this specifically.

With both versions, make sure that compatibility with "legacy apps" 
is maintained, as much as possible. I don't want to lose my DOOM II
:-))

Jim
jamesl AT albany DOT net - http://www.albany.net/~jamesl/