www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/09/16/22:02:21

From: ksinner AT solaria DOT sol DOT net (Kenton E. Sinner)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: 32bit DOS.
Date: 17 Sep 1997 00:33:19 GMT
Organization: Solaria Public Access UNIX - Milwaukee, WI
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <874456398.792858@smyrno.sol.net>
References: <Pine DOT SOL DOT 3 DOT 94 DOT 970915182420 DOT 28764A-100000 AT taz>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsreaders.sol.net
Cache-Post-Path: smyrno.sol.net!unknown AT solaria DOT sol DOT net
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Kevin A. Pieckiel (kapieckiel AT Harding DOT edu) wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Sep 1997, Michael F Brenner wrote:

> > (3) DOS does not have perfect multi-programming-ness, and needs help    

> There's where you're messed up.  There is no such thing as a perfect
> operating system or perfect this or perfect that.  All this garbage about
> a 32-bit DOS and pros and cons about it and other OS's..... people
> (including myself) are spinning their wheels for nothing.  A 32-bit DOS
> will not solve the world's problems in computing.

I don't want to solve the world's problems in computing, I just want
to be able to use my familiar and resource-frugal DOS programs without
having them tie up the machine (e.g. long downloads and printouts,
lengthy compiles, etc.), and without having to buy a 2 gig hard drive
and a new motherboard, and ...

> If you want 32-bit
> console apps, there are other 32-bit OS's out there to do it (*nix), and
> if you want a 32-bit graphics application, there are pure 32-bit, fast
> OS's that can handle that (my preference is WinNT--OS/2 just doesn't have
> the support nor appeal to me, and Win95 is not pure 32-bit).

None of these options can run very well on my current hardware. :-(

> Even if you had a 32-bit DOS, you're just gonna find problems with that,
> too.  There's not a piece of software on this planet that is good enough
> for anyone.

It just has to be good enough for me, and I'll use it.

> There's always something wrong with it.  I hope neither DJ
> nor anyone else DOES write a 32-bit DOS, as I'm certain it will not be
> accepted in the market.

Market schmarket.  See previous paragraph.

> There will be no support.  MS is pushing to put
> Windows NT on home desktop computers.  This means that before long, people
> can be self-suffient on pure NT/95 native, 32-bit code and DOS will be by
> the wayside.  It is my belief that 95 will also hit the ground and be
> forgotten.  Backwards compatibility with DOS will eventually be
> nonexistent.  In the longer future, hardware may do the same....  Who
> knows, Intel may be able to one day push into the homes of people a
> processor without the problems posed by the current Intel architecture.


P7?  We can only hope...

> Or better yet, Intel will fall to its knees and be absorbed by Digital and
> we will all have cheap alphas on our desks.  I don't know.  But it won't
> be long before the software market has forgotten DOS.  The average user
> will one day not even have heard of DOS without reading a book on computer
> history.

People in the computer industry used to say, "By the year 2000 nobody
will be running these programs anyway.  So what do we need with more
than 2-digit year variables?!"

> <soapbox mode off>

Likewise (for now :-)

--
Single, white, Milwaukee-area male seeks romance with non-smoking female.
Are you caring, bright, humorous, sensuous, between 18 and 35 years old?
I am a computer programmer in my mid thirties.  Turn-ons: good food,
pre-sputnik SF, roller coasters, fast computers.  Turn-offs: taxes,
internet regulation.  Send email if interested.

Hi, my name's Ken (Hi, Ken!), and I'm a programmer ...
I can change ... if I have to ... I guess ...

postmaster AT localhost
postmaster@[127.0.0.1]

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019