🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Jun25.174819.7992@netcom.COM> resnicks@netcom.COM (Steve Resnick) writes:
>
>I would say to those running < DOS 3.1, "TOUGH!" We're THREE major
>releases and a good 6 years from the time when 2.1 was released. I can
>understand not fixing something that isn't broken, but if new software
>breaks it, then the old DOS is broken, not the new program. Were it
>the other way around, we would still be using dBASE II, Perfect Writer
>and Perfect Calc on CP/M machines, or worse yet, TRS DOS.
>

Yes, but a pc running 2.10 is still a good usable machine (unlike some
of examples above.  :-) )  I have a friend with an AT&T 6300, with old
ROMS.  Until he upgrades his ROMS ($50 from AT&T) he is stuck with
DOS 2.10, and 8k clusters.  However, he is able to run 4DOS, Word Perfect,
Turbo C, and has run a BBS on that system.  

All that aside, it's still good to keep in mind that argv[0] doesn't work
under Dos 2.10 when you are writing a program for a client who happens
to be running 2.10, and is unwilling or unable to upgrade.  It's not
a flame, it's just something you should keep in mind.  (I use argv[0],
and when Spike tries to run my programs they fail on the first go round.)
If you want your software to run on the widest possible variety of machines,
just take that into account, just like not masking the 8th bit.  

Beware of blind one handed Icelandic hackers using dos 2.10 and an xt-style
keyboard!  ;-) ;-) ;-)

Shaun.


-- 
shaunc@gold.gvg.tek.com  

-- 100,000, perhaps 200,000 or more Iraqis died in a "Turkey Shoot"
   inappropriately called a "war."  -- Michael Albert