TOS 1.4 vs NEODESK and UIS-II

Article View: comp.sys.atari.st

Article #36978

#36978

From: Greg Csullog
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1989 03:22

22 lines
1505 bytes

I have read a mess of specs on TOS 1.4. I also own NeoDesk 2.0 and the UIS-II.
Personally, with NeoDesk and the UIS I cannot see any reason to buy TOS 1.4.
Can someone give me an honest opinion on what advantages 1.4 would provide?

FOLDXXX.PRG fixes the folder limit
DISKFREE.PRG speeds up the slow FAT access
STARTGEM.PRG allows GEM codes to autoexecute
STARTUP.PRG allows system reconfig on boot (my start up screen says:
            M=Mac       I=IBM        A=Atari
            to run Spectre, PC_Ditto, GEM
NITE.PRG gives me a screen save
UIS_II.PRG has replaced my need for Crystal for DOS functions from in an appl.
NEODESK.PRG for a hard disk system is essential in my opinion.

(awards of merit should be given to UIS and NEODESK authors)

Why, pray tell, would I want TOS 1.4; my Mega 2 with a Megafile 20 blows away
80286/80287 machines for DTP (average print time from Timeworks DTP to an
SLM804 laser is 43 seconds; average print time from an AT to an HP laserjet
is > 7 minutes for programs like GEM Draw with lots of hash patterns!)

What will I miss out on if I do not get TOS 1.4? Anything?

Technical Details

Message-ID: <8903100344.AA03075@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!AECLCR.BITNET!01659

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!AECLCR.BITNET!01659
From: 01659@AECLCR.BITNET (Greg Csullog)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: TOS 1.4 vs NEODESK and UIS-II
Message-ID: <8903100344.AA03075@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 10 Mar 89 03:22:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 22