Message-Id: <199705290152.VAA17407@delorie.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 20:52:22 -0500
From: "Jonathan E. Brickman" <brickman AT cjnetworks DOT com>
Reply-To: "Jonathan E. Brickman" <brickman AT cjnetworks DOT com>
To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: OpenDOS/32
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

>>> Programs developed explicitly for OpenDOS/32 will be much faster,
>>> more capable, and have more features at their disposal.

>>And what will motivate developers to write explicitly for
>>OpenDOS/32?

> Aren't YOU motivated yet? :)

No.  I have all the 32-bit software and OS I need using
Windows 95.

> _I_ certainly want to see a flat-memory, PM Dos :)

I'd love to see a 32-bit clean DOS, fully compatible
to the large DOS app base, with lots of 32-bit-clean
DOS software.  However, I'd much rather prefer
a 32-bit-clean fully GUI-based DOS-compatible
and Win32-compatible environment.  Until somebody
automates Linux far more, I don't think we're going
to see it.  Meanwhile, Windows 95 comes sufficiently
close for me to get the things I need to get done done.
NT console apps are 32-bit-DOS enough for me.

Jonathan E. Brickman         River City Computing, Inc.            (913) 232-6663
http://www.cjnetworks.com/~rivercity                    brickman AT cjnetworks DOT com
It seems to me that men usually think more about carburetors, and women
think more about doors.  I think the world needs really good carburetors...and
really good doors.