X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to opendos-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: opendos AT delorie DOT com
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: Most Recent Copy of DRDOS
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 06:41:05 -0800
Message-ID: <2B815701B04CA747A7BBFD8424196F7B02A8E6C6@PRISCILLA.datalight.local>
In-Reply-To: <200902080505.n18551O8001463@delorie.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Most Recent Copy of DRDOS
Thread-Index: AcmJqvOI+HmcdOGKQ2CGyKLemU+gdwBGF04g
References: <200902080505 DOT n18551O8001463 AT delorie DOT com>
From: "Jamie Ferrier" <jamie DOT ferrier AT datalight DOT com>
To: <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
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

Datalight's ROM-DOS is still available and supported.   It offers Fat32,
LFN, and Emm386, though it does not have a memory "tweaker" like
memmaker.   A DOS internet connectivity suite is also available.
ROM-DOS is a true DOS and does not offer multi-tasking.   DOS extended
applications can be run on top of ROM-DOS to break the 640K memory
limitation.   You can get more information at www.datalight.com.   =20

>> I sincerely appreciate yor help. There doesn't seem to be very many=20
>> dos users out there anymore, so it is a bit refreshing to run into=20
>> one every now and then. Might you know of any other versions of dos=20
>> that are more dynamic than PCDOS? I mean, with more memory and=20
>> multi-tasking capabilities.
> I'm still running DR-DOS 7.03 on several machines for JNOS Packet=20
> Radio and I use JNOS as for several servers.
> DR-DOS has a version of QEMM build in the EMM.
> I started, obviously, with M$ DOS 5.0 as supplied with the computer=20
> and have used that with QEMM 6 I think it was, but reasonably quicly
moved to DR-DOS.
> I have a PC DOS copy, but I definitely prefer DR-DOS.
>
> You might also check out FreeDOS.
> Is is supposed and indeed seems to be a very powerfull DOS, but I only

> have been playing with it for a moment. It seems it needs somewhat of=20
> a learning curve, at least that was my impression as I did get a bit=20
> of a Linux commandline version install when I did install it on a test

> machine that I basically did not look at since due to lack of time.
>
>

_______________________________________________
Jamie Ferrier=20