From: pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org (Peter J. Farley III)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: 32bit DOS.
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 1997 07:43:30 GMT
Organization: None
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <341a4228.830126@snews.zippo.com>
References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 32 DOT 19970912052940 DOT 0069aaf8 AT chasque DOT apc DOT org> <5vddeq$gq5$2 AT news DOT sendit DOT nodak DOT edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.newsdawg.com
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk


adalee AT sendit DOT sendit DOT nodak DOT edu (Adam W Lee) wrote:
>Screw backwards compatibility...  If we're going to take a step ahead we
>can't be looking back...  I'm sick of using a weak processor (80x86)
>series and a week OS series (DOS) simply because people want backwards
>compatibility...  I mean, I'm glad that so much stuff will run on my
>computer and stuff, but I'm getting sick of being tied down by the past.
>We could have such better processors (Alphas) by now if we weren't so
>damned worried about still being able to run QEdit and Space Invaders.

Adam,

It's not QEdit (my text editor of choice, BTW -- I still have not made
the move to Emacs) or space invaders that's the problem, but
commercial packages like WordPerfect and Quattro Pro (DOS, of course)
that people need, for compatibility with their co-workers at the
office.  The *nix environments have not provided very good versions of
these applications, and it is these applications that people learn and
use in their everyday working lives.

And don't forget the non-*nix network communication products, either
-- Lotus Notes in particular.  Many, many companies *live* on Notes,
and *require* managers to have acess from home PC's.  And that
probably requires Win9x, at this point.

But as DJ said, if you need Win95, then run Win95 (or 98 or whatever)
in another boot partition.  I can live with that.

----------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org)