Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:00:36 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <3.0.16.19900626120215.34d70896@hem.passagen.se>
X-Sender: bernie AT hem DOT passagen DOT se
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 Demo (16)
To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
From: Bernie <bernie AT hem DOT passagen DOT se>
Subject: Re: Opiniom on Different versins of DOS
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com

Neal wrote:
>MS -DOS 6.0 was really bad, but at 6.22 they finally got it right.

What was wrong with it? (I'm currently using 6.2 but have my 6 original
disks somewhere around (actually upgrade disks so if I want to use it I
must upgrade from my 6.2 original disks <g>)) I probably have the upgrades
for 6.21 and 6.22 someplace here as well. The main diffrences between the
6.x versions were with Doublespace.

>MS-DOS 5.00 is notoriously bad, I'm not familiar with 5.01 or 5.02.

Really? I've never heard anything wrong with it (5 I mean - didn't even
know other 5.x versions existed). I've used it on a machine for many many
years without ever any problems. And there was no Scandisk with that
version either (the only program that's worse than Windows IMNSHO, hmm...
well perhaps DoubleSpace fits there as well). Only drawback with anything
before 6 is IMHO that it doesn't have defrag.
//Bernie
http://bernie.arachne.cz/ DOS programs, Star Wars ...