Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the board
Thread view  Mix view  Order  «  
 
Khusraw

30.10.2007, 22:29

@ sol

Seagate and DOS

 

> Rather than being a clueless moron - why don't you try reading the thread
> before making assumptions?

Better be good enough to answer my question in another style or it could be possible that next time I'll replay your shitty posts in a manner more familiar for your limited understanding.

Khusraw

30.10.2007, 22:34

@ sol

Seagate and DOS

 

And please re-read your own posts and count the number of self-contradictions that can be found, my "bright" Mr. Sol.

sol(R)

30.10.2007, 22:43

@ Khusraw

Seagate and DOS

 

> OTOH better be good enough to answer my question or it could be possible
> that next time I'll replay your shitty posts in a manner more familiar for
> your limited understanding. And Mr. Sol, be aware of the fact that I

What indication do you have that my understanding is limited?

> reduced to silence people more frustrated and more blatant than you are,
> so please "don't start the game"!!!

I'm not the least bit frustrated. Blatant perhaps :) - but that's so that everyone understands.

And, alright, I'll answer your "question", since you asked so politely.

> I don't understand why you insist so much on this topic of DOS inferority

That's why I was being so "blatant" - so you could understand. I've failed, apparently :(

> and obsoleteness. I'm sure that people here are using modern OS-es besides
> DOS and they know very well their advantages. Considering this fact, you
> don't bring anything new and you are waisting your time. However, I am
> very curious to know what provoked you this obsessive attitude. Perhaps:

Switch to board view, scroll up and you'll see all non-DOS OSes are being knocked with no mention of their upsides while there appears to be some assertion that DOS is best:

"Mr SOL, you greatly underestimate the DOS user base. It's still millions!"

"What's Menuet got to offer? OctaOS? SolarOS? DexOS? SkyOS? Haiku? FreeBSD? OpenBSD? Minix? OS/2? Windows? AIX? Tru64? IRIX? Solaris?"

"30 seconds is great compared to Windows and Linux, but DOS can boot in less than 1 second"

"Even PuppyLinux requires 128 MB of RAM nowadays, and ReactOS needs 64 MB at minimum. Of course, that's considered excellent by most people. DOS is sometimes best"

"What does DOS not do that it should do?"

> 1). You received a revelation and now you are a preacher who tries to
> convince others until the end about the truth he has found.

Yes, I was born and lived in the basement at Microsoft's HQ until I decided to venture out just recently. My mom was an obsessive compulsive DOS programmer who simply kept coding after I popped out of her. My only possessions consisted of some DOS manuals from the 80s and a 386 --- all these other fancy OSes are amazing!

> 2). You consider that there must be allways purely pragmatic reasons for
> using a specific OS and you think that those who use the OS for other
> reasons are ignorants who must be enlightened by the superior power of
> your pragmatical reasoning.

Scroll up and point out where I state that an OS must be practical to be used, or that no one should use DOS for any reason.

> 3). It's very hard for you to bury your past and you need some help to do
> this, but the help hasn't yet come.

Silly, basements are already buried.

sol(R)

30.10.2007, 22:47

@ Khusraw

Seagate and DOS

 

It's too bad you edited the section out of your post admitting you were presumptuous.

sol(R)

30.10.2007, 22:48

@ Khusraw

Seagate and DOS

 

> And please re-read your own posts and count the number of
> self-contradictions that can be found, my "bright" Mr. Sol.

You're welcome to point them out.

Rugxulo(R)

Homepage

Usono,
31.10.2007, 00:43

@ sol

The DOS user base is much larger than you think

 

> You're calling LFN (the way DOS implemented it) and FAT32 improvements?
> Not only that, but improvements that somehow push DOS towards being
> competition for other OSes? Oh please...

FAT32 exists, whether we like it or not. MS-DOS 6.22 (the last stand-alone version sold) didn't support it. FreeDOS implemented it later on. So yes, I consider FreeDOS (being "free" as in freedom) improving the situation by supporting FAT32, which is already in use. This gives more people access to it (or better access, even).

Rugxulo(R)

Homepage

Usono,
31.10.2007, 00:51

@ sol

Seagate and DOS

 

> Switch to board view, scroll up and you'll see all non-DOS OSes are being
> knocked with no mention of their upsides while there appears to be some
> assertion that DOS is best:

DOS is still very good at some things: smaller, simpler, faster perhaps. But there is no "best" OS or everyone would exclusively use that one. No one is saying DOS is superior to everything else. We do all indeed use other OSes. But it's more the *nix or Windows crowd scorning everything else that can be frustrating. Just let everyone use what they want. But if someone expects us to abandon DOS, it ain't happened yet! :-P

Khusraw

31.10.2007, 01:12

@ sol

Seagate and DOS

 

> What indication do you have that my understanding is limited?

The fact that you misunderstood the intention of my post.

> And, alright, I'll answer your "question", since you asked so politely.

Thanks.

> Switch to board view, scroll up and you'll see all non-DOS OSes are being
> knocked with no mention of their upsides while there appears to be some
> assertion that DOS is best:

Personally I didn't knock any OS. But this is a DOS forum and you must understand DOS fans. The are enough boards for praising other OSes.

> Scroll up and point out where I state that an OS must be practical to be
> used, or that no one should use DOS for any reason.

What do you understand by "practical"? In all your posts you praise practicism.

> Silly, basements are already buried.

In this case, what's your point?

Khusraw

31.10.2007, 01:22

@ sol

Seagate and DOS

 

> It's too bad you edited the section out of your post admitting you were
> presumptuous.

I tried to moderate the tone of the debate, which is not bad at all. If I was just presumptuous or I spoke the truth, search and you will find.

Khusraw

31.10.2007, 02:29

@ sol

Seagate and DOS

 

> You're welcome to point them out.

It's not my business to do your job, but I'm disposed to give you two clues:

1. You affirm that DOS has so few users because it is a rudimentary and antiquated OS, but OTOH you claim that improving and modernising it is a waisting of time exactly because it has so few users.

2. You affirm that you use DOS only in an emulated environment and that you are intersested in it only as an emulated OS, but you have no posts in the "Emulation" category of this forum. OTOH you started your endless tirade against DOS pointing at the posts of a very active programmer whose work is not important for an emulated DOS environment.

sol(R)

31.10.2007, 04:35

@ Khusraw

Seagate and DOS

 

> The fact that you misunderstood the intention of my post.

Clearly your communication skills are lacking, as opposed to my misunderstanding your intention :)

sol(R)

31.10.2007, 05:01

@ Khusraw

Seagate and DOS

 

> > You're welcome to point them out.
>
> It's not my business to do your job, but I'm disposed to give you two
> clues:

You mean, rather, that your statements are baseless aside from two stretches you call "clues"?

> 1. You affirm that DOS has so few users because it is a rudimentary and
> antiquated OS, but OTOH you claim that improving and modernising it is a
> waisting of time exactly because it has so few users.

You're making an awfully large (and completely untrue) inferrence there. I never made any such claims, and I certainly never say "waisting". "Improving and modernising" is not what's taking place. Crawling forward is.

It's a waste of time because it's futile, not because there are few users. When I talk about DOS being junk in a lot of ways, I am referring to its core components; the file system, memory allocation/access, executable formats, scripting language, driver framework...

Want to modernise/improve DOS? You'll have to rip those things out and recreate them. What have you got left of DOS? Nothing.

> 2. You affirm that you use DOS only in an emulated environment and that
> you are intersested in it only as an emulated OS, but you have no posts in
> the "Emulation" category of this forum. OTOH you started your endless
> tirade against DOS pointing at the posts of a very active programmer whose
> work is not important for an emulated DOS environment.

Now you've got not only inferrence, but outright lies :)

1. I boot via USB key to DOS, as well, as I mentioned in my post (the same one where I mentioned emulation).

2. I fail to see how putting perspective on DOS and stating exactly what it is...is an "endless tirade" against it. I would stick up for its strong points if anyone were picking on those, but that's not the case. There's just people stating it's things it isn't.

3. Comments around the anti-social programmer are irrelevant, especially since I clarified that I do boot to DOS.

lucho

31.10.2007, 10:32

@ sol

Questions to Solomon

 

> > But in my opinion only supermen can learn to program for Windows and Mac OS X...
>
> They're even easier than DOS in a lot of ways - just have to let go of the
> reins a bit. Maybe try to program for a different OS than those two though... :)

What do you mean?

In general, why are you here?

Why didn't you answer my questions about your boot disk?

Let me confess that I feel uncomfortable debating with someone wearing a domino. Perhaps my communications skills are limited but I'm not native English speaker. What communication is that when you can't say "Hello, I'm <so and so>"?

RayeR(R)

Homepage

CZ,
31.10.2007, 12:40

@ sol

The DOS user base is much larger than you think

 

> Because their tools are already written for DOS, and it makes it much
> easier to make software that accesses hardware directly to do so
> OS-independently or using DOS.
>
> READ: "Much easier to make software that can destroy your data and crash
> your PC in DOS."

Yes, I also write my own low level tools dealing directly with HW (good to learn how HW works) and DOS is the best choice for this because I'm not limited/disturbed by other unwanted things. Later I learned how to write KMD for Windows NT/2k/XP/Vista so I can port my sw there too. But DOS is still the best for trying when many crash may occur during debugging.

At second view DOS is part of my life, I like good old dos progs, games and demoscene so it's my hobby like other people running their 8bit computers. Any emulation is not 100% perfect so I'm interested in trying, helping, utlilizing DOS to run on new HW.
DOS is not my primary OS I have installed others like well tuned Win98SE (DOS multitasking with good compatability and GUI :), old NT4.0, XP-SP2 and Debian Linux and I tried many others.

I also have one machine running DOS as olny one primary system - it's stand-alone MP3 jukebox machine as a part of my hi-fi. It's a P166/8M running FreeDOS and MPX play with some custom drivers for LCD and IR control. SW loads in ramdisk and powerdown the HDD (playback from CD). It's running for 6 years without problems (I only sometimes updated MPXplay and DOS files).

---
DOS gives me freedom to unlimited HW access.

Khusraw

31.10.2007, 14:44

@ sol

Seagate and DOS

 

> You mean, rather, that your statements are baseless aside from two
> stretches you call "clues"?

No, I don't. You didn't understand that my posts were a game intended to make you finally tell us what really torments your soul. Your answers were previsible.

> You're making an awfully large (and completely untrue) inferrence there.
> I never made any such claims, and I certainly never say "waisting".
> "Improving and modernising" is not what's taking place. Crawling forward
> is.
>
> It's a waste of time because it's futile, not because there are few users.
> When I talk about DOS being junk in a lot of ways, I am referring to its
> core components; the file system, memory allocation/access, executable
> formats, scripting language, driver framework...
>
> Want to modernise/improve DOS? You'll have to rip those things out and
> recreate them. What have you got left of DOS? Nothing.

If some OS has improved all that you pointed before, it has just "evolved", but if DOS does the same, it becomes for you another OS! Look at what happens now on different programming forums when kids ask about DOS. There is allways an "all-knowing" person disposed to answer by telling them that they are waisting their time putting DOS questions, and they must look in another place in order to be in step with the times. These people are like you, frustrated individuals, who are obsessed with their own past. You are incapable to understand that they know very well what they are doing and they have a computer experience totally opposed to yours. What you discovered time-worned, after many years of computer experience, they allready know by heart. They are just searching for something different, but you do all that's possible to stop them. Who do you expect to continue developing DOS? For example I live in a burgeoise society and I must bend to its rules. With my max. 4-5 spare time hours per day, and having a family at home, it's almost impossible for me to contribute to DOS development. I'm sure that many others are in the same situation. It is not a lack of interest, but a lack of time, and that's because DOS developing is an "unproductive" task.

DOS has not lost because of its flaws, but because Microsoft has abbandoned it. The same thing is happening now with Windows98. When recently one of my video cards died I had to replace on that computer Windows98 with XP. And do you know why, Mr. Sol? Because there are no Windows98 drivers available for the new card, and the card was the only good quality AGP card still available in the computer stores from my home city. The rest were PCIe. If you are bound to buy new hardware, you must switch to the latest Microsoft OS product. Please read with more attention the hardware packages. The products are "made to be used" with Microsoft's last OS, and in the best case they just "support" Linux etc. When some hobbyists took Unix as model for developing their own OS, they did that because they connected DOS with the powerful and hated by them company. With all of its advantages over DOS, Unix was less user friendly. Unix-es will be allways one step behind Microsoft. Until the hobbyists beg for documentation and try to successfully hack software, Microsoft is already ahead. How many people are using only Linux and how many people are using only Microsoft's OS? In the countries were authorities are still not so much interested by the fact that people use pirated software, I asure you that almost no one uses Linux. Linux was and will be the poor man's option. What has Linux to offer, disregarding the price, and Microsoft's last OS lacks?

> Now you've got not only inferrence, but outright lies :)

You are a calumniator.

> 1. I boot via USB key to DOS, as well, as I mentioned in my post (the same
> one where I mentioned emulation).

What greater self-contradiction are you capable besides.

> 2. I fail to see how putting perspective on DOS and stating exactly what
> it is...is an "endless tirade" against it. I would stick up for its
> strong points if anyone were picking on those, but that's not the case.
> There's just people stating it's things it isn't.

Formerly I thought that you are just another "devil's advocate", but later I convinced myself that you are a frustrated and disoriented person who in the past earned from DOS and now he can't. Please show a single new thing you revealed in this thread.

> 3. Comments around the anti-social programmer are irrelevant, especially
> since I clarified that I do boot to DOS.

You called him anti-social because of, in your opinion, his "improper" reactions, but what you have to say about yours, Mr. Sol, when you called me "moron". BTW, do you know how many times this great and respectable DOS programmer had to defend his honour because of the insults of "want-nothing" jesters, some of them more skilled than you?

Jack

31.10.2007, 15:46

@ Jack

Let's End THIS Poor-Old Thread, As Well!

 

Let's End THIS poor-old thread, as well!

Lucho, Khusraw, Rugxulo, and Tom, I am grateful for all your support and for
your positive comment about UIDE, which I shall continue to improve in every
way consistent with its remaining "generic" and FAST.

I agree with all of you that DOS is still used by more than some people want
to admit, and it still is useful for those who cannot or will not use larger
systems. I was told, 4 months ago by Lucho, that my cache driver makes DOS
"Faster than Windows!" for file copies, and perhaps for other work. People
can run their own tests and decide about this for themselves.

Better for us all who want DOS to continue using DOS, continue to improve it
and merely ignore all on this board (and others) whom my Mother described as
being only "S*** Disturbers"! They contribute nothing.

sol(R)

31.10.2007, 17:26

@ Khusraw

Seagate and DOS

 

> make you finally tell us what really torments your soul.

Replying to comments about DOS having millions of users and being competition with all the other OSes out there means I must have a tormented soul? You're odd.

> "evolved", but if DOS does the same, it becomes for you another OS! Look

If you tear out & replace the file system, memory allocation, executable formats, scripting language, driver framework...is it really DOS when there's nothing left of it, if it runs no DOS software/drivers?

> DOS. There is allways an "all-knowing" person disposed to answer by
> telling them that they are waisting their time putting DOS questions, and
> ...
> These people are like you, frustrated individuals, who are obsessed with
> their own past. You are incapable to understand that they know very well
> what they are doing and they have a computer experience totally opposed to
>
> ...bla bla...
>
> I live in a burgeoise society and I must bend to its rules.
> With my max. 4-5 spare time hours

Sounds to me like you're the one that's "tormented" - you've tied your home/emotional life to DOS, gotten offended and immediately assumed I'm exactly like someone else instead of reading carefully.

Like I said, I have done quite a bit and still do some development for DOS. I've got an understanding of the OS well enough to re-write it from the ground up without any assistance. What I pointed out was a reality --- I was not advocating for everyone to stop using DOS, but rather not talk about it like it's something it isn't.

Saying DOS is something it isn't, is not just an insult to other OSes, but an insult to DOS as well.

> DOS has not lost because of its flaws, but because Microsoft has
> abbandoned it.

Only partially true. Do you remember what I said above about ripping out all the core components, required to improve the OS? This is what they realized. Win3.1 and Win9x were basically new OSes except for a few areas --- they supported/emulated some interrupts, they kept the file system, etc. This was at the expense of some security/stability.

> hobbyists took Unix as model for developing their own OS, they did that
> because they connected DOS with the powerful and hated by them company.
> With all of its advantages over DOS, Unix was less user friendly.

This is possibly the most ridiculous thing I've heard on this board so far.

Unix was popular in academia - especially considering it was actually thought through and implementing theories in computer science. DOS was a heavily marketed toy invented over lunch.

You don't build a house on quicksand -- and you wouldn't build an OS with a poor memory model, no security and no multitasking.

Also, why don't you try looking up "POSIX". OSes written based on standards? OMG, How absurd!

> that almost no one uses Linux. Linux was and will be the poor man's
> option. What has Linux to offer, disregarding the price, and Microsoft's
> last OS lacks?

Looks like I was right about you looking in the mirror when you call me a "tormented soul". You're getting upset that I'm saying DOS has few users and that it doesn't offer much...and now you're saying that Linux has *nothing* to offer. Seems you're far worse than you accuse me of being.

1. It's open source = won't get stuck in the 'DOS' situation where it has to be entirely rewritten if the developers abandoned it.

2. No DRM, spyware, or control of the creators over the OS. Don't know what DRM is? Look it up.

3. Designed around security. Far fewer serious security holes as a result.

4. Comes with drivers covering most hardware.

5. No GUI by default - can network/multitask in text mode.

6. Comes with software for file/disk encryption & encrypted network traffic, compression, listening to network data, reading many file systems, etc.

7. It's stable. Run it for a year without rebooting if you'd like, without much trouble at all.

I could continue.

> You are a calumniator.

Because I pointed out your lies?

> Formerly I thought that you are just another "devil's advocate", but later
> I convinced myself that you are a frustrated and disoriented person who in
> the past earned from DOS and now he can't. Please show a single new thing
> you revealed in this thread.

I didn't claim to be revealing anything new - just correcting misinformation.

> You called him anti-social because of, in your opinion, his "improper"
> reactions, but what you have to say about yours, Mr. Sol, when you called
> me "moron". BTW, do you know how many times ... bla bla ...

Actually, I called you a "clueless moron" -- because you reply without reading to understand. You still haven't, so I still assert that it's true.

Apart from that - I don't care if no one uses my software or has a bad opinion of me. Jack was complaining no one was using his, so I suggested why that might be.

Back to the board
Thread view  Mix view  Order  «  
 
15113 Postings in 1359 Threads, 249 registered users, 23 users online (0 registered, 23 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum