Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 18:00:23 -0500 (CDT) From: Your Mother To: "Kevin A. Pieckiel" cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: 32bit DOS. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk OK, you guys are taking me a little too seriously here... I don't mean we should completely reinvent the wheel, I just mean we shouldn't have to use the same exact thing, because that won't let us get anyhwere... OK, I'll come up with a real life example of why backwards compatibilty is bad. Today, I installed a six disc changer in my car. Now, I really like this changer (I've had it for a while, just moved it between cars) but I got to thinking about it. I really don't like the fact that the CDs have to be upside down inside the changer, because you can't tell which CD is which... I was wondering why they would do something dumb like this as opposed to having it right-side up, but then I realized that early technology most likely dictated that the CDs had to be upside down, and we've been stuck with it since because we have to remain standard. In wanting to get rid of some backwards compatibility, I don't mean we'd have to move to a completely new sytem, like DATs or MDs, but rather just fix the little things that bother people. I feel much the same way about DOS. If OpenDOS achieves all of the things it claims it will, it will be the greatest possible OS for single user situations IMHO... It, however is being dumb by placing the multi-tasking outside of the kernel and still using EMM386, since this was the main problem with DOS in the first place. This is just my little opinion, feel free to flame me but don't expect a reply. :) +--- -- -- - - | [pHiXx/VorteX] : phixx AT usa DOT net : .