Message-Id: <199705111629.SAA19410@magigimmix.xs4all.nl>
From: "yeep" <yeep AT xs4all DOT nl>
Cc: <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: EXT2 filesystem information
Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 18:21:21 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

> > Yet!
> > We are trying to make better than any other OS aren't we?
> 
> I don't think that is what we're trying to do at all.  I think we
> are trying to bring DOS into this century if anything, and to
> possibly put it's foot solidly into the future of computing.
> 
> As much as I like OD, and the idea of OD, it is hardly going to
> be better than any other OS.  Each OS has it's strong points and
> it's weak points.  No OS will EVER do everything better than any
> other OS, and to strive for that is rediculous.  Multiple tools
> for multiple jobs.  If someone gave me a hammer with a built in
> screwdriver and said "this does everything, and does it best".  I
> would still use my trusty separate hammer, and separate
> screwdriver.  Do you see my analogy?

Yes, I do.
Maybe I was a bit unclear.
What I meant was, that OD should be a good OS, without some of the stupid
mistakes or features which some OS's have.
Windows NT doesn't need PnP (at least the server doesn't).
VFAT was kinda stupid for windows 95.
Those sort of things should be avoided in OD IMHO.
Of course, OD will never have the network capabilities NT server has, or
something similair
I didn't expect OD to be the OS to end all OS's :-)
But I think in terms of support and customizability, OD should be one of
the best (if not THE best) OS.
Many people use DOS because it's so simple, if we could add the open-ness
that made Linux what it is, that's what I want!

	Yeep