🚀 go-pugleaf

phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN) writes:

>I agree it is too much to expect MS to merely upgrade a product to such
>high levels of performance, but I disagree that it is necessary to go
>to such extremes as OS/2 and UNIX, where things all work differently,
>just to get a few of the basics that should have been in DOS 1.0 from
>day 1 had the programmers been given the freedom to, and had the
>willingness to "do it right".

I think you need to think of this in its historical context.  First, the
8088 could only address 1 MB of memory so DOS had to fit in there.  Second,
when "they" gave users 640K, most thought "Are you mad?  What will you do
with all that RAM?"  Remember, at that time a 128K Apple was hot stuff...

Now, perhaps something should/could have been done somewhere about DOS
versions 2 or 3....

Robert
--
| Robert L. Howard             |    Georgia Tech Research Institute     |
| rhoward@msd.gatech.edu       |    MATD Laboratory                     |
| (404) 528-7165               |    Atlanta, Georgia  30332             |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|     "Reality is showing us that perhaps we should do with nuclear     |
|      power the same thing Keloggs is advocating for Corn Flakes -     |
|      Discover it again for the first time." -- John De Armond         |