🚀 go-pugleaf

kens@hplsla.HP.COM (Ken Snyder) writes:


] dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) writes:
]| In a previous article, proberts@disk.uucp (Phil Roberts) says:
]| >Why, "according to all reports", is DR DOS 5.0 superior?

]| According to norton 5.0, I have 584k of free conventional memory left.
]    According to Norton 5.0 I have 587k of conventional memory left.
]| 
]| That's pretty superior.
]    Superior to what????

]  I am curious about DRDOS 5.0 (I've seen the adds) but the question
]remains, what will it do for me that I don't already have?  Obviously,
]memory management isn't it (at least from this example).

Command help for one.  C:\> DIR/H gives you something rational about
how to use DIR...  The same for most (if not all) other commands in DR
DOS.  Granted.  You probably don't need this. 

Nifty-whiz-bang-setup utility for quick reconfiguration...  Again, it
doesn't sound like you *need* this. 

FILELINK.  Our response to an OS supplied lap-link...

A rational TREE command.

I would expect that they big gains are in memory management for
_people_who_don't_already_have_it_...  I would also say that the
comparison is against vanilla DOS 3.3 or 4.01... 

We are not comparing vanilla operating systems with add-ons, we are
comparing operating systems to like operating systems. 
--
Frotz