Poll: MS-DOS Versions

2»

Comments

  • :: About speed, if you try to write and run a number-crunching application for plain DOS and the same for Windows and you benchmark them, you' ll see what i mean.
    :


    Yes, I agree with you about speed -- Windows and unix are not very good for real-time applications. I did that kind of bench mark a few years ago when we thought of porting our real-time app from MS DOS 6.X to Windows 95 or unix, and found that it would not work because windows and unix were too slow.
  • : :: About speed, if you try to write and run a number-crunching application for plain DOS and the same for Windows and you benchmark them, you' ll see what i mean.
    : :
    :
    :
    : Yes, I agree with you about speed -- Windows and unix are not very good for real-time applications. I did that kind of bench mark a few years ago when we thought of porting our real-time app from MS DOS 6.X to Windows 95 or unix, and found that it would not work because windows and unix were too slow.
    :

    Overall, Windows is a poor operating system - period. Windows is pure GUI... nothing but looks and flash, built originally around a DOS core... Microsoft's own words. More of Microsoft's words have been that Windows is now it's own entity. False. It still to this day has snippets of DOS within it (even XP). Billy-boy would love you to believe such things. It truly kills me (makes me laugh) that there's a new version each year... truly, what are the improvements? The bottom line, Windows is a terrible approach to multi-tasking... Unix fares a bit better... but OS's like HP's RTE and DEC's VMS were born to it. Besides all of that, I'd cut my arm off first before buying and using XP... I prefer to keep Microsoft's nose out of my surfing and computing activities. Can't you just wait for the future?!? I'd suggest you, we, all, learn how to "Baaaa" like sheep and "Moo" like cows... the fleecing and milking has only just begun. I'll throw one more stone in this pond... Intel is a liar and a cheat... the Pentium technology and speed was available back in the late 1980's... but after spending major $$$ to develop it only to find that Japan had caught the US with it's pants down with regard to processing power/speed, Intel decided to recoup it cash by releasing Pentium in phases... any of you recall the import embargo against Japan's technology in the 80's???... they were only allowed in PROVIDED the processor was Intel's... interesting huh?... do the homework and prove it to yourself (don't just take my word for it).

  • There's something called Arachne that works in DOS, you can access the 'net from DOS. Don't know how stable it is, though. No personal experience with it.

    Version 6.21 all the way!!
    ---------------------------------------------
    I've got a plan, but I'm going to need a dead monkey, some empty liquor bottles, and a vacuum cleaner.

  • : : :: About speed,
    :
    :
    I have, i think, in orter 3.0 for laser 3.2 for pc 6.22 for pc And 7.0 to 8.0 for win 95 - win me
    i my self have and amd athlon orignal 650mhz 256 mb of ram and i can dualboot to win 98 or xp home 98 takes about 30-45 secons to boot xp 45-60 no over cloking. But i do agree dos is signfcantle more stable and about 45-60 seconds to boot off of my tweeked boot disk (1 disk to boot 2 more for all the uttlties)

  • : This is a simple poll. If you reply, put your version of DOS (because I'm curious). I run a 6.2 which is found on old systems but is better than Windows 9x and up.
    :

    I have a set of Dell Dos 6.22 and I have that installed but for my emergency boot disk I use PC DOS 7.0 (200 compliant verison) as it works better and I don't have to have a certain version of a program.

    I do you use Windows but only at school, Im more of a Linux and Dos person at heart.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories