Reply-To: "Sean Middleditch" From: "Sean Middleditch" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp References: <35B58218 DOT BA040281 AT logic-gate DOT com> <35B5AAB0 DOT 459BF813 AT calderauk DOT com> <6p4btq$bre$1 AT star DOT cs DOT vu DOT nl> Subject: Re: Sound libs 4 DJGPP Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 16:16:48 -0400 Lines: 59 Organization: AwesomePlay Productions NNTP-Posting-Host: usr18-072.provide.net Message-ID: <35b64989.0@news.provide.net> To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk The real reason Win95 is better than DOS is because DOS is very slow. For example, try opening a large file is pure DOS and then in Win95. You'll find that Win95 will open it much faster, unless you have lot of DOS add-ons. Win95 also speeds up memory, allows plug-and-play ( game programmers love that ), and more. For example, under DOS, every program must be configured to the computer. If you change something on your computer, all your programs have to be re-setup. In WIn95, just change the Win95 configuration, and all programs that weren't made by idiots will run fine. Win95 also offers hosts of other improvements, including the file system, support of multiple drivers, more software ( what was the last useful commercial program made for DOS? ), etc. Sit down and compare the specs od Win95 and DOS. If you really know anything about computers, you will see that Win95 has maybe one or two things that aren'y better than DOS ( like the way it takes control away ). But if you're good, you can often program around these flaws, and end up with programs that ae much more powerful than anything DOS could have done. The other thing you have to realize is that if you plan to make a libing by programming, you'll have to wake and do it on Win95. The common populace doesn't know how to use DOS anymore, and that nmakes all the difference when you're trying to sell a product. Trust me, I know. I still am a bit of a DOS freak. I'm still using DJGPP, even though I have a top-of-the-line Win95 Borland compiler. But I still realize that Win95 has it's advantages, and that If I don't want to live in a one-room apartment, eat Chinese every night, and use a car that runs only when the stars are aligned properly, I'll have to learn to program Win95. Sean Middleditch ( the Realistic Programmer ) of AwesomePlay Productions http://www.angelfire.com/biz/aweplay aweplay AT hotmail DOT com Boon van der RJ wrote in message <6p4btq$bre$1 AT star DOT cs DOT vu DOT nl>... >JP Morris (jmorris AT calderauk DOT com) wrote: >> It's difficult to recompile the thing in pure DOS, you'll need a very >> good DPMI server. If you work in a win95 DOS box, that should be ok. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Isn't this a contradiction;-? Or do you mean a DPMI server that doesn't >care to much about de-referencing NULL-pointers? (which IMHO isn't a >_good_ DPMI server) > >If you have reasons why win95-dos-box is better than CWSDPMI, I would >be highly interested. (or what are the problems compiling midas?) > >Greetings, > Robert. > >PS. this is not intended as a flame, or a personal attack, but I would > really like to know why win95 is better. Hmmm, while thinking > about it, I use win95, even while I think it's worse than DOS in > most respects. (can't we just switch back to the C64 again ;-). >-- >rjvdboon AT cs DOT vu DOT nl | "En dat is niet waar!" sprak (ex?) Staatsecre- >www.cs.vu.nl/~rjvdboon | taris Netelenbos (onderwijs) fel.