Comments: Authenticated sender is <alaric+abwillms AT sdps DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
From: "Alaric B. Williams" <alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
To: grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 10:45:21 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Usage of directory entries
Reply-to: alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
CC: "Alaric B. Williams" <alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>,
        Matthias DOT Paul AT post DOT rwth-aachen DOT de, opendos-developer AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <199704251242.OAA11933@grendel.sylaba.poznan.pl>
References: <861911958 DOT 0525139 DOT 0 AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
Message-ID: <862047721.1010357.0@abwillms.demon.co.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On 25 Apr 97 at 14:41, Mark Habersack wrote:
> Once upon a time (on 24 Apr 97 at 20:08) Alaric B. Williams said:

> > You mean /more easily done/. Easier for programmers. Better for users 
> > if it happens invisibly.

> I am really sceptic about such 'invisible' or 'automatic' things - after 
> experiences with M$'s software...

You think something's bad because of Microsoft's implementation of
it is bad?!?!? That would make you hate DOS, C++, Java, GUIs, ...
 
> > Priorities... this isn't Linux we're building here... OpenDOS is for
> > everyone. IMHO.

> True, but why wouldn't it be a "real" operating system like Linux is?

"real"?

> In 
> fact, we should take as much from Linux as we can with OpenDOS still being 
> DOS!

Yup. But don't take the ethos of hackerlyness! Linux is for hackers, but
OpenDOS must be for mere users, too. People who don't want to learn about
drivers and filing systems - they wanna start up Word Perfect and go...


ABW
--
Alaric B. Williams (alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk)

   ---<## OpenDOS FAQ ##>---

Plain HTML: http://www.delorie.com/opendos/faq/
            http://www.deltasoft.com/faq.html

Fancy HTML: http://www.deltasoft.com/faq0000.html