1 Sep
2006
1 Sep
'06
5:09 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Shoppa" <shoppa_classiccmp at trailing-edge.com>
To: <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: Age cutoff, was: Recommendations for operating system
And I consider all such discussions (different MS-Windows versions) to
be of zero interest to me.
I will occasionally boot up into some variant of MS-DOS to run
some disk imaging tools (e.g. teledisk, 22disk, others) Time between
such boots is measured in years!
All this shouldn't necessarily influence others, because I have
gotten VERY good at getting a glazed look on my face when they start
talking about MS-DOS or MS-Windows or MS-anything after their
original (and somewhat portable) BASIC.
All of this is a flashback to the days of the early/mid 80's when all
of a sudden Dr. Dobbs' stopped having interesting articles and
all the articles were about MS-DOS and TSR's and other things I
never even wanted to know about ever! Not then, and not today 20
something years later!
Tim.
To be truthful I don't get into the OS much at all (any of them). I view the
OS as just the interface between my machine, its hardware, and the software
I want to use. I have no love for init strings, memory managers, and stuff
like that for DOS, but since I love quite a few games from the DOS era (and
like to use original hardware instead of emulating) I put up with it (and
since I lived through it in the 80's I am used to it anyway). The same goes
for classic Mac OS for 68K machines plus Amiga OS and everything else. Sure
some OS were better then others of their era for different tasks, they are
ok to explore but that gets boring fast to me unless I need them to get
something done.
Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
> > > I think I said "Windows 95 or better," which means Windows
1.0,
2.x and
> > > 3.x are (should be?) on topic.
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Teo Zenios wrote:
> > I think Win 3.x is much different then anything after it, might as
well
be
another OS.
Those differentiations are very subjective.
To me, Win95 is just Windoze 4.00
OTOH, I consider NT to be significantly different.