Sender: mlueck AT lueckdatasystems DOT com
Message-Id: <200012241904.OAA19928@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 14:04:15 -0500
X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Professional (2.10.2010) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;1)
In-Reply-To: <200012241832.eBOIWr910250@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 10:32:53 -0800 (PST), Jim Stevenson wrote:

>Is it not true that win/me win2000 will not run dos apps?>

At least considering Win2K, as I do not have me: Depends on the app. Some work,
some do not. IBM PC DOS Rexx runs on Win2K. I think even WordPerfect 5.1 for
DOS runs on Win2K.

Your question was geared at a DOS that would do FAT32 / which MS DOS 7 does do.
I did not mean installing all of Win98 - just move the files in
\Windows\Command into \DOS, keep Command.com, io.sys, msdos.sys, and you pretty
much have MS DOS 7. There are tweaks you can make to msdos.sys to make it act
more like real DOS, like to prevent it from showing the Win98 splash screen
when it boots from a HDD.

If someone relies on running DOS apps, then keep using DOS. If they require a
new OS, then it seems best to consider new apps as well, yes? I do not
understand why people think they need to have the newest wiz bang OS and yet
run the oldest apps they can get their hands on.

Just my 2c.

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