Sender: mlueck AT lueckdatasystems DOT com
Message-Id: <200012241550.KAA23900@spdmraac.compuserve.com>
From: "Michael Lueck" <mlueck AT lueckdatasystems DOT com>
To: "opendos AT delorie DOT com" <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 10:49:44 -0500
X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Professional (2.10.2010) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;1)
In-Reply-To: <200012241453.eBOErs409664@eos.arc.nasa.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Dos future?
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: opendos AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 24 Dec 2000 06:53:54 -0800 (PST), Jim Stevenson wrote:

>HOw likely and soon should we have a Dos that works with fat32?

For simple stuff, MS DOS 7 (aka Win98SE) is not bad. I use that to image
Windows 2000 on FAT32. I actually would not call that task simple either. It
uses InfoZip32, CWSDPMI, DOSLFNBK, a 64MB RAM Drive from Europe to cache the
zip files from the server, another European RAM Drive came with a secondary
device driver to dummy drive letters so I can ensure the ramdrive is always H:,
etc... My next project is to build a small bootable Windows 2000 partition
based on the install disks to mount and access NTFS directly.

For running games and such, I have no idea how well MS DOS 7 works.

Michael Lueck
Lueck Data Systems
http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/