🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep08.214711.25892@ux1.cts.eiu.edu> cfdwe@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (David Ebdon) writes:
>Tom Wilson's remark in a previous post reminds me how I solved a boot
>failure problem when I first put OS/2 on my 486-33 clone.  Actually my 20
>year old son solved it.  We were using the dual boot procedure, and the
>system "forgot" how to come up in OS/2.  First we "sys-ed" it back to life
>and then changed MS-DOS 5.0 for the IBM version (keeping qbasic.exe from
>MS-DOS so that it and edit.com would remain functional).  We then
>reinstalled OS/2, again in the dual boot mode.  So far there have been
>no more boot failures.  Is there some problem with generic MS-DOS and
>OS/2?  Or would I have had the same good luck by simply reinstalling OS/2?
>I tend to think not since some problems with the DOS windows, experienced
>before the change in DOS, disappeared.  One of my colleagues today reported
>that some network software which had frequently failed became very reliable
>when MS-DOS was replaced by IBM-DOS 5.0--even on non-IBM (Zenith)
>hardware.  Our network software is from IBM.  Hmmm.

I don't believe that.   I installed OS/2 on a machine with MS-DOS 5.0.

I don't think there are any significant differences besides the 
name strings and Basic.

Luc B