X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f996b,9ba64c635b2340c1 X-Google-Attributes: gidf996b,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-09-25 01:32:35 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!212.74.64.35!colt.net!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news6-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: stumo@bigfoot.com (Stuart Moore) Newsgroups: alt.ascii-art Subject: Re: Dead or alive... Message-ID: <3bb03f94.722670@news.ntlworld.com> References: <4tcuqt0h924vpaid8ue9g8h33bl2pj7o0n@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243 Lines: 46 Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 08:27:45 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.253.85.129 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news6-win.server.ntlworld.com 1001406442 62.253.85.129 (Tue, 25 Sep 2001 09:27:22 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 09:27:22 BST Organization: ntlworld News Service Xref: archiver1.google.com alt.ascii-art:7924 On Tue, 25 Sep 2001 02:44:14 -0000, anonymous@bogus_address.con enlightened us with: > > On 2001-09-24 nowhere@nowhere.co.uk said: > > >Why would you want to use DOS anyway? It's the worst OS there is. > > Not so. DOS is a small, relatively efficient O.S. ...unlike > that bloated pointee-clickee abomination. > > But more importantly, DOS allows the =user= to make the > decisions about how he wants his machine to look, act and > perform. It's a much more 'down-to-the-metal' O.S., where > the =user= is in control...not some megalomaniac in Redmond, > Washington, U.S.A. > > Besides, DOS is ten times faster than WinDoze on any given > machine. > > Plus, the DOS executable files for any productivity software > programs are 20 to 50 times smaller than a comparable WinDoze > program. A 500 meg hard disk is =more= than sufficient for > a DOS-based machine. You simply don't need a mega-gigabyte > drive. > > And we haven't yet mentioned security. I think we all know > how 'secure' WinDoze is. Not! :) > > >If you're going to use the console, at least use something decent > >like Linux. > > Although it's a 'techie' O.S., and therefore not everyone's > cup of tea, Linux is okay. But it suffers from many of the > same ailments that afflict WinDoze: bloat, hogging of system > resources, etc., plus a relative dearth of software choices. How does software choice for Linux compare with that for MSDOS? And not just out of date software (e.g. web browsers have to have reasonable javascript & java support plus CSS...) -- o |\ _[] L_ === Stuart Moore []\, stm