Message-Id: <199703221923.OAA28299@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: opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 14:20:46 -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
In-reply-to: <19970322.091819.4303.1.chambersb@juno.com>

> 
> On Fri, 21 Mar 1997 23:17:09 -0500 "James Lefavour"
> <jamesl AT mail DOT albany DOT net> writes:
> >> I _love_ that idea :)
> >> Kind of like an extended command parser?
> >> 
> >> ...Chambers
> >
> >Not sure exactly what you mean... but what I'm saying is that the 
> >next level would not repeat the mistakes of M$.  Long file names and 
> >full 32bitPM would be available from the command line, and the 
> >"display mode" (as in W95) would be just a layer over that, adding in 
> >support for standard controls, windows, etc.  When you don't 
> >want/need the extra overhead, you don't load it, but you still have 
> >more than full DOS functionality :-))
> >
> >Jim
> 
> What I meant was, it's basically a nifty looking command prompt :)
> Of course, there would be an API for windowing etc, but the graphical API
> would be the only difference between it and vanilla OD.
> 
> ...Chambers

Well, generally this is correct - although I don't propose adding 
Windoze compatibility until we start making the 32 bit version, some 
may want 3.1 compatibility in the 16 bit version.  However, I do 
suggeest that as much of the functionality as possible should be 
available from the "nifty looking command prompt" - of course the GUI 
functions would be "layered" over it.

Since Linux and X became available, no one should say it isn't 
possible, but we need enough interested people to get it done to make 
it happen.  Can I see a show of hands? <g>

Jim

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