🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <703214134snx@crynwr.com>, nelson@crynwr.com (Russell Nelson) says:
>
>DOS is dead.  (At most) A year from now no one will be programming for MS-DOS.
>

Maybe 5 years from now. And still then, many will be programming
in DOS.  I'm assuming you are making this statement becasue of
upcoming releases of OS/2 2.0 and Windows NT.  Since both support
DOS apps, if everyone ran either OS/2 or NT, you could still make
$$$ programming DOS apps if there was no OS/2 or NT equivalent.
Even so, in 5 years, I'd guess only about 1/2 of the PC base
will have enough machine power to even run these OS's.

>What will spur the abandonment of DOS?  Well, people have long
>acknowledged that DOS is not a real operating system.  The only
>reason to run DOS is because you can't run a real operating system.

First, DOS is a real operating system.  I assume you say DOS is
not a "real" OS becasue it does not directly support 32 bit programs
and is not a GUI.  DOS is every bit an OS as Unix.
Windows 3.x is NOT a real operating system--it is an operating
enviroment.

>We now have the metal to run those operating systems.  Because the
>benefits of a real operating system will outweigh the cost, people
>will run them on their new machines.

You might have the metal to run a true 32 bit OS, but many people
do not. In fact, if you are running Windows 3.x and I am running
DOS 5.0, Surprise! I am running a real OS and you are not.

>
>That leaves DOS only running on 8088s and 80286's.  These machines
>will be worth very little and so will be purchased by people on tight
>budgets (or donated to nonprofits, etc).  There will be not much
>money to spend on software.  But of course, we know the cost of
>software development is not going down like hardware costs.

This is becaoming more and more true, but your predictions are
over exaggerated.

>
>So, the only people buying expensive new software will be people
>running the new real OS(es).  Programmers interested in making the
>big bucks will program to this new audience.  And it *won't* be
>Windows, which is as lame an OS as DOS is.

With windows already established base, I don't see it dying out.
Your statements are based mostly on your opinion, not on facts.
Perhaps instead of people you should say: "Me and people like me"

>
>Oh yes, there will be *some* people programming for MS-DOS, just like
>there are still new programs being written for the Zenith Z-100,
>Tandy Color Computer, Commodore C-64, CP/M, etc.  But there will not
>be much money in it.

What OS(s) are you referring to thoughout this post. I assume
OS/2 since you indicate Windows is lame. I hope not Unix, since
for the price of a PC which can run Unix, you might as well
buy a Unix Workstation.  One thing you neglect, is that even though
MS-DOS is dead, (Why would MicroThieves introduce a DOS which will
compete with Windows?) I'd predict we will see a 32-bit, multi-
tasking DOS from Digital Research within 2 years.

CONCLUSION: DOS is not dead, and will not be for many years.

James