Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

Compatibility woes / deprecation (Miscellaneous)

posted by Rugxulo(R) Homepage, Usono, 14.02.2009, 23:07

> - Before Giulio, FPC had no dos maintainers for a long, long time (say 5-7
> years). Nobody contributed a single line of Dos related code, fixed bugs
> etc.

How long has FreeDOS been stable? (I can only guess beta8 in 2003 or so. Before that, I'm not sure it was good enough for everyday use. But that's just a guess since I never tried earlier versions.) How long has QEMU and BOCHS been stable? DOSBox? All of that makes a difference, esp. when your OS isn't DOS friendly any more (NT). I've heard many people say, "I don't have a DOS setup anymore." And modern installs of Windows using NTFS, hogging the whole drive, doesn't help.

> They have to keep wrestling with 8.3 support, memory limitations, thread
> support limitations, unicode deficiencies of that one platform _every_
> day.

8.3 can be easily worked around (ROM-DOS, DOSLFN, StarLFN, Win9x, Win2k). Memory limitations? Not in flat model. Thread support? No standard method, too many hacks. Unicode? Even Win9x didn't barely support that, so you can't complain there (since nobody cared back then anyways). Let's face it, even GNU proposes all comments in code be in English, so that proves the English bias in the world. Not saying that's ideal, but seriously, saying Unicode is a deal breaker is a bit exaggerated. (Besides, Win32s didn't have threads or Unicode either except latter via wimpy codepage conversion.)

> (XP rant skipped, but I don't agree:
> - The two comparisons are not equal: Pre sp1 XP had several performance
> problems and a bad driver situation.
> - Most of the so called advantages only worked for the people coming from
> age-old win98. For the win2000 crowd XP felt pretty much like Vista would
> feel to the crowd that started with XP crowd later: a minor point upgrade
> that sucked resources.
> )

Not true. Win2k was pretty light on resources (comparatively) unlike Vista. Heck, even XP is so much lighter that it's the newest OS that MS could cram on a netbook (until Win7 is finalized). And XP -> Vista broke some things ... unlike 2k -> XP, where they actually improved some stuff (e.g. added SB emulation for DOS apps). I can't think of anything fixed in Vista that was broken in XP, esp. not for DOS (which at one time was MS' bread and butter, there is a huge legacy there, whether you acknowledge it or not). Quake (DOS) will not run on XP or Vista. This is directly due to bugs that MS just plain refused to fix. I just am incredulous that they would let things fall apart. It's so frustrating.


Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
15350 Postings in 1388 Threads, 254 registered users, 9 users online (0 registered, 9 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum