Subj : multitask or die!
To   : David Drummond
From : Charles Angelich
Date : Tue Nov 20 2001 08:22 pm

123333c2c183
unix



Hello David - 

DD>>>>>> I thought he claimed to be a DOS user. 

CA>>>> Yes, I am a DOS user, whatever that means. 

DD>>> Someone who dabbles at the commandline and doesn't have
DD>>> to use a GUI shell to get the system to do what they want. 

CA>> That would describe me. 

DD>>> I too do this, except I use Linux to do it, not DOS. 

CA>> Then you don't have people trying to feel superior because
CA>> they _don't_ use the command line bothering you? 

DD> No - infact the shoe is on the other foot. I'm bothered by
DD> their incompetance when they cannot use the commandline. 

I'm beginning to have more sympathy and greater tolerance for
that type of person. Trying to find settings multiple menus
(clicks) deep on W9x has taught me that it's no picnic either.
:-\ 

CA>>>> Most people do use DOS they just don't like to mention
CA>>>> it and they don't know how to do as many things with it
CA>>>> as I do. 

DD>>> Many people have no need of tinkering at that level. They
DD>>> use their machine to perform certain "productive" tasks
DD>>> ie WordProcessing, and can do that rather well. 

CA>> They usually maintain that "productive" equipment using
CA>> DOS utilties or rescue it when it crashes using DOS disks.
CA>> ;-) 

DD> Not at our work. All data is stored on servers (and backed
DD> up). All workstations are expendable. If one does kark, we
DD> re-install it (by booting from the CDROM) 

I don't usually discuss work here. This is FIDO where most are
hobbyist or at least USED to be hobbyists. If I needed
professional advice I would go to usenet groups myself. 

Hobbyist are notorious for having no backups and many/most rely
on DOS utilities to reformat and restore what they trash. 

DD>>> I believe there are "systems" people out there, and then
DD>>> there are "applications" people. 

--8<--cut 

DD>>> Linux provides me with all of the tinkering I require,
DD>>> plus it has the added functionality that DOS did not
DD>>> provide. 

CA>> Yes, I've read that many times. What in particular were
CA>> you unable to do in DOS that LINUX does for you now? 

DD> Multiple applications running simultaenously for one. 

I started using IBM computers with DoubleDOS. Only two tasks
but it worked on an XT. When the company upgraded to an 80386 I
moved to Desqview. That worked well enough most of the time.
The machine multitasked 24/7 monitoring the PBX and spitting
out reports on same.

All of my machines have Desqview and W31 installed on them.  I can
telnet, ICQ, and chat in IRC at the same time while scanning the
hard drive for files etc. using DOS apps and, of course, do the
same in W31 if I wish.

I've dabbled with OS9 on a machine with only 64k of memory. If
OS9 was where LINUX is now we wouldn't be having this
discussion and I'd be using OS9 here. ;-) 

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>     <|                              |>  __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

___ * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
.... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/

--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

.