Article View: comp.os.msdos.misc
Article #2913Re: Is dos 6.0 gonna multitask? Or have no memory barrier????
From: Dave Ratcliffe
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 19:02
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 19:02
54 lines
2896 bytes
2896 bytes
In article <1772@frackit.UUCP>, dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe) writes: > In article <1992Nov6.020133.29137@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, jav2d@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Jason Adams Vanvalkenburgh) writes: > > baloo@mik.uky.edu writes: > > > Is dos 6.0 gonna multitask, and do away with the 640k memory barrier? > > > If not I won't believe it. Dos has gotten so far behind the times. I'm > > > completely sick and tire of 'out of memory messages' I'll have to switch > > > to unix if dos 6.0 doesn't shape up. > > I switched to Unix. And I feel muuuuuuch better now. :) > > > What about OS/2. You get DOS, OS/2 and Windows compatability for a > > lot cheaper tha unix. > > Ahem..... Allow me to present you with: > The following should say CONSENSYS. Sorry about that. My brain went on hiatus fora minute. It was all this talk about MS-DOS that did it :) > Coherant (if you can deal with nearly zero after market support unless > you pay through the nose for it) It won't happen again, HONEST! > MWC (Decent from what I've been told and getting better) > > Linux (Ask around. It has a loyal following on the net - see newsgroup > comp.os.linux for more.) > > > Especially considered that IBM's newer version > > of OS/2 should be due out first Quarter '93, fixing bugs that are > > inherent in all versions of an OS. > > You mean like NT was due out 4th Q/92? Riiiiiight. MS = More Slippage > > > With DOS 6 who knows what you'll get. > > Everyone knows what you get with any version of DOS. Another OS release > that will have bugs they don't want to acknowledge but will charge you > substantial $$$ to upgrade away from when they finally fix them. > > I really wonder if MS is aware that a substantial number of their > customers are aware of how OS's function beyond a fancy GUI? We're not > as stoopid [tm] as they think we are. > > Yes, I run DOS here and I also run CP/M-86 on a Seiko 8610 but my REAL > computer runs Unix and thanks me for it daily :) > -- ...uunet!wa3wbu!frackit!dave -or- | Dave Ratcliffe | frackit!dave@uunet.UU.NET -or- dave@frackit.uucp -or- | Sys. <*> Admin. | vogon1!compnect!frackit!dave@psuvax1.psu.edu | Harrisburg, Pa. |
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1774@frackit.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uwm.edu!psuvax1!vogon1!wa3wbu!frackit!daveReferences:
<baloo.721011468@mik.uky.edu> <1772@frackit.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uwm.edu!psuvax1!vogon1!wa3wbu!frackit!dave From: dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc Subject: Re: Is dos 6.0 gonna multitask? Or have no memory barrier???? Summary: Dumb mistrake - humblest apologies to Coherant Message-ID: <1774@frackit.UUCP> Date: 14 Nov 92 19:02:00 GMT References: <baloo.721011468@mik.uky.edu> <1772@frackit.UUCP> Organization: Data Factory Services, Harrisburg, Pa. Lines: 54