Has DOS quietly evolved to the point where MS Office 2003 or MS Publisher
will run on it?.. can you now download pictures from a digital camera and
print then in full colour to glossy paper with any of your DOS utilities?..
I remember using Tasword, WP 5.1, DBASE III and Lotus 123 on a versions of
DOS, but also remember the print quality.. I don't remember using scalable
fonts, or being able to put pictures into a document..
It was all fun though, eh.. limited productivity, but a great learning
experience.. messing with memory managers.. editing autoexec.bat,
config.sys, and win.ini.. and it all led to home networks running Win XP Pro
SP2.. great productivity.. multitasking.. so many possibilities..
We feel no pain, but might if we all had to revert to DOS..
No, and I say that with some certainty. Did if I leave the impression
that DOS was a replacement for Windows, W2k or Mac?
However, the poster was asking for help and I indicated that not only is
DOS not dead (merely buried in MS-DOS sense--RIP '99) but is alive and
well and being developed as I write.
And as was pointed out, the repair console is proof that direct disk
access (outside/beneath the GUI) is not only more efficient for many
applications, but a necessity.
While it may well happen, it hasn't been completely replaced---some
functions require DOS. So far, when one chooses error checking,
(chkdsk?? dos?) your computer will usually tell you it is unable to
complete the operation but will do so the next time you reboot.
For me, a 200 meg partition is a small sacrifice (less than your MS
Office requires?) to store, and have at hand scores of applications
that do more, do it more safely and do it faster than in the XP/W2k mode.
In general, I have greater success with using dos for partition
management, disk geometry, partition table and master boot record,
diagonotics, disk diagnostics (ever heard of an application named
Spinrite?).
And, of tha 200 meg, I'm only using about 45 meg. It include all of
MS-DOS 7.0, Freedos, two snazzy graphic interfaces (for those that are
unable to funciton without a mouse) and dozens of pure dos utilities or
the dos version of Partition Magic, Ghost, Drive Copy...a long list of
apps that are still the wiser option (the dos version, that is).
Not unlike the functions that MS still has chosnen to leave as non-GUI
tasks.
I wasn't suggesting (and of course you knew that) one abandon their
current OS. Newer is often better. Old, at least for now, is still
necessary.
To write off, or ignore the advantage of direct disk access is not only
ignorant it is not correct (it exists and is used in current OS's).
I can deal with stupidity and even bad humor.
But that should be kept at home.
Why not focus on the positive, and indicate the the clever poster is not
only not wrong to inquire how DOS can be used, but Dos is happy to
reside if one prepares in advance and creates a "home", a partition
where hundreds of DOS apps can reside and take up less space than a
System32 folder.
Are DOS's best days behind it. Perhaps, in the quantitative sense---but
it still more than holds its own in several areas and thus is the choice
for functions in a current OS.
I'll quit using my DOS applications when:
1. When MS allows me.
2. When I find that an alternative which is safer & faster-- and by
those to standards alone: Better.
Ignore, or bash DOS----you *are* using it and don't know it. Sorry that
you haven't chosen to use it more or been made aware it exists and is,
so far, still necessary.
benefits
No, scoring clever debating points does not always promote good
computing. No, DOS is healthy and well, if not understood.
The "marketplace" has eliminated many good products, but DOS is around
and perfoming and outperforming *current* apps.
Bravo to anyone who is willing to make a small effort in order to reap
that on balance, make that effort minimal.
--
Lead, follow or get of of the way.
I'll help you if I can.
If you don't have a solution? I don't want to hear from you.
