Gordon Keehn wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
You agree, so there's no need for further discussion.
Would someone show me their copy of Windows running on an 8086/8088?
Hmm. As I recall, Widows 1.0 was pretty bad. I no longer have a copy.
I do have a copy of DesqView, which I have on occasion run on my 8088.
It's been a while now. The 8088 machine is almost (but not quite)
retired. The hard disc is dead, and it runs off of floppy only.
5 1/4 inch, of course.
Or for that matter an 80286, except as an interesting toy? I'm willing
to stipulate that MS DOS ran well on those processors. As did PC DOS,
and DRDOS, and CPM/86 (and probably a few more that I'm missing). I
Good. Glad you are willing to concede that. NB, that I never said
that running on old machines makes MicroSoft products in all ways
better than Linux. It just makes them better than Linux for that
one thing.
I have machines I run MSDOS 6.0 on today. In fact, one of them
is up 24/7 with an UPS, cranking away.
know a professional writer who still uses the DOS version of Word
Perfect, because it does everything she needs, with no learning curve.
Doesn't surprise me. OTOH, writers are notorious for using outdated
technology. I wouldn't be surprised to find that some of them still
use manual typewriters.
That doesn't mean I have to (or even want to) use the same tools I used
in 1980. I don't even want to go back to using Windows 3.1 (which only
ran on '386 or better processors).
Windows 3.1 was notorious for "general protection faults". But I still
have a copy. I don't ever run my copy of Windows 2.something on my
286 laptop anymore.
But MSDOS is very much still alive at my house. I also note that
there are the dosbox and dosemu+freedos projects for Linux.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
