sleeping with the enemy

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Sir Alari » Sat, 05 Jul 2003 23:01:09



i see all of you using some form of dos. this is good. i'm trying dr dos and
4dos and freedos. sadly, i don't have enough software to do all this stuff
from dos. like the web making my modem work, and the usual wordprocessors
and image files. can any one recommend a good way to get started. tired of
bill and windoze. (sleeping with the enemy)

bob

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Ted Davi » Sun, 06 Jul 2003 01:27:14


On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 08:01:09 -0600, "Sir Alaric"


>i see all of you using some form of dos. this is good. i'm trying dr dos and
>4dos and freedos. sadly, i don't have enough software to do all this stuff
>from dos. like the web making my modem work, and the usual wordprocessors
>and image files. can any one recommend a good way to get started. tired of
>bill and windoze. (sleeping with the enemy)

 <ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/>  This is the classic
standard DOS freeware/shareware archive - they have hundreds of
thousands of programs for real DOS.

I just took a look and found (under editors) that they still have
PC-Write (an excellent cross between a programmers text editor and a
word processor).  I looked for As Easy As, but didn't see it (Lotus
123 clone).

However, the usual alternatives to Windows are Mac and GNU/Linux -
recent reports indicate that GNU/Linux is overtaking Apple as the
second most popular desktop workstation (and Apple's OS-X is basically
BSD Unix with a custom GUI).



 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Robert Riebisc » Sun, 06 Jul 2003 01:50:16



>  <ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/>  This is the classic
> standard DOS freeware/shareware archive - they have hundreds of
> thousands of programs for real DOS.

Other sites:
http://www.opus.co.tt/dave/
http://members.cox.net/dos/

Quote:> I just took a look and found (under editors) that they still have
> PC-Write (an excellent cross between a programmers text editor and a
> word processor).  I looked for As Easy As, but didn't see it (Lotus
> 123 clone).

A 30-day evaluation copy is available from:
http://www.triusinc.com/zips/aseasy.zip

--
Robert Riebisch
Bitte NUR in der Newsgroup antworten!
Please reply to the Newsgroup ONLY!

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by ma.. » Sun, 06 Jul 2003 06:04:42


Do you have specific tasks you want to perform, please list them?  In
addition to simtel try these large sites for free and shareware dos apps:

http://members.cox.net/dos/index.htm#news

http://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/

Quote:>i see all of you using some form of dos. this is good. i'm trying dr dos and
>4dos and freedos. sadly, i don't have enough software to do all this stuff
>from dos. like the web making my modem work, and the usual wordprocessors
>and image files. can any one recommend a good way to get started. tired of
>bill and windoze. (sleeping with the enemy)

>bob

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Marco van de Voor » Sun, 06 Jul 2003 08:03:41



> On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 08:01:09 -0600, "Sir Alaric"

> I just took a look and found (under editors) that they still have
> PC-Write (an excellent cross between a programmers text editor and a
> word processor).  I looked for As Easy As, but didn't see it (Lotus
> 123 clone).

> However, the usual alternatives to Windows are Mac and GNU/Linux -
> recent reports indicate that GNU/Linux is overtaking Apple as the
> second most popular desktop workstation (and Apple's OS-X is basically
> BSD Unix with a custom GUI).

In addition there are also the free BSD variants. On x86, I personally like
FreeBSD more than Linux.  This is (to me) more a decision based on packaging
and quality of release engineering than some more fundamental difference.
 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Ted Davi » Sun, 06 Jul 2003 10:00:53


On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 23:03:41 +0000 (UTC), Marco van de Voort


>In addition there are also the free BSD variants. On x86, I personally like
>FreeBSD more than Linux.  This is (to me) more a decision based on packaging
>and quality of release engineering than some more fundamental difference.

I am reminded of the early days of VCRs: Betamax was a technically
better system than VHS, but VHS was marketed better.  A lot of younger
people have never heard of Betamax.  Similarly, not many have heard of
BSD - not even those using it as the base under Mac OS-X.


 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Marco van de Voor » Sun, 06 Jul 2003 23:32:02



> On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 23:03:41 +0000 (UTC), Marco van de Voort

>>In addition there are also the free BSD variants. On x86, I personally like
>>FreeBSD more than Linux.  This is (to me) more a decision based on packaging
>>and quality of release engineering than some more fundamental difference.

> I am reminded of the early days of VCRs: Betamax was a technically
> better system than VHS, but VHS was marketed better.

I'm from Eindhoven, NL, better known as Philips-city. Betamax and VHS were
_both_ inferior to Philips Video 2000 :-)

Quote:> A lot of younger people have never heard of Betamax.  Similarly, not many
> have heard of BSD - not even those using it as the base under Mac OS-X.

Never having heard of Betamax is btw not that strange over here. Even in its
days it was hardly used here :-)

But back to the point, VHS was at least cheaper (tape AND VCR), and had more
"*" content available. (which is why the video rental shops adopted it).

Japanese VHS VCRs were available here at about Eur 150-170, while Philips
V2000 systems still costed over Eur 500. But, V2000 tapes that haven't been
played over a decade are still crisp, and a much higher percentage of the
VCRs are still functioning.

But what was the advantage in the Linux case over BSD? When it started to
boom, it was still technologically inferior, but it was even more expensive
(more restrictive license). The only thing I can think of is that it was
a bit faster in adopting the newer hardware types. (SCSI to IDE, cheap NIC
support)

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by phil » Sun, 06 Jul 2003 23:33:24



> i see all of you using some form of dos. this is good. i'm trying dr dos and
> 4dos and freedos. sadly, i don't have enough software to do all this stuff
> from dos. like the web making my modem work, and the usual wordprocessors
> and image files. can any one recommend a good way to get started. tired of
> bill and windoze. (sleeping with the enemy)

> bob

if you want a really decent *dos* browser
that uses a gui  try   arachne

(it will come up on a google search)

it also contains an email reader and tcp/ip stack

it can be transferred on *one* floppy

arachne will work on as little as an 8088 cpu
and a 386 with 4 megs or ram will run it very well

the only issue i;ve had with it is on pentium grade machines
with a lot of ram...the arachne memory assignment actually works
better if setup for a slow cpu rather than a fast one...

at any rate the suggestions to try linux are alos good ones
i think slackware is one of the better distros for making use
of minimal machines

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Ted Davi » Mon, 07 Jul 2003 00:42:34


On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 14:32:02 +0000 (UTC), Marco van de Voort


>But what was the advantage in the Linux case over BSD? When it started to
>boom, it was still technologically inferior, but it was even more expensive
>(more restrictive license). The only thing I can think of is that it was
>a bit faster in adopting the newer hardware types. (SCSI to IDE, cheap NIC
>support)

Better marketing.  There are a number of companies and other entities
pushing various GNU/Linux distros, but few promoting BSD.  Better
promotion leads not only to more users, but also to more people and
groups contributing software for it, and therefore more supported
hardware and more applications.


 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by stray.. » Mon, 07 Jul 2003 12:37:07



> Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 08:01:09 -0600

> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
> Subject: sleeping with the enemy

> i see all of you using some form of dos. this is good. i'm trying dr dos and
> 4dos and freedos. sadly, i don't have enough software to do all this stuff
> from dos. like the web making my modem work, and the usual wordprocessors
> and image files. can any one recommend a good way to get started. tired of
> bill and windoze. (sleeping with the enemy)

> bob

I became fed up with Win9x back in '98-99 and started looking hard at
alternatives including retro (i.e. DOS), linux, and OS/2. Now, most of my
computing is DOS or DOS/Win3.1 (I consider Win3.1 better than later
versions but there are a few new things out that you can't get SW for
under Win3.1, so, I just don't do that stuff). Linux is very nice, but it
will also make you appreciate the simplicity, speed, fast bootup, and
small size of DOS. Also, you don't have to 'shutdown' the OS before you
turn off the power switch if you use DOS.

You have to just 'pick up' on the details as you go. Read the Newsgroup
postings, try the stuff, keep what works and throw away the stuff you
either don't like or can't get to work right.

Art


SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by mcalho » Tue, 08 Jul 2003 23:07:15


Quote:>....[snip]....
>....(I consider Win3.1 better than later
>versions but there are a few new things out that you can't get SW for
>under Win3.1, so, I just don't do that stuff). Linux is very nice, but it
>....[snip]....

Since Windoz Me presented me with its imfamous blue-screen-of-death, I've
been considering reverting to 3.1, but haven't because I don't know where
one can obtain software (mostly web browser(s)) that will run on it.  Are
there still web-sites that specialize in 3.1 software?

--Myron.
--
Five boxes preserve our freedoms:  soap, ballot, witness, jury, and cartridge
PhD EE (retired).   "Barbershop" tenor.   CDL(PTX).   W0PBV.   (785) 539-4448
NRA Life Member and Certified Instructor (Home Firearm Safety, Rifle, Pistol)

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Art Sower » Wed, 09 Jul 2003 01:50:26



> Date: 7 Jul 2003 09:07:15 -0500

> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
> Subject: Re: sleeping with the enemy

> >....[snip]....
> >....(I consider Win3.1 better than later
> >versions but there are a few new things out that you can't get SW for
> >under Win3.1, so, I just don't do that stuff). Linux is very nice, but it
> >....[snip]....

> Since Windoz Me presented me with its imfamous blue-screen-of-death, I've
> been considering reverting to 3.1, but haven't because I don't know where
> one can obtain software (mostly web browser(s)) that will run on it.  Are
> there still web-sites that specialize in 3.1 software?

yes, but I don't have them handy. Do a search on "freeware," "downloads,"
sharware, etc., you will get many.

You might be able to get Opera 3.62 for Win3.1 straight from
www.opera.com. Netscape 4.08 (the highest for Win3.1) is available from
some websites, too, but its  a big 15 mb or so. Opera is much smaller
(cant remember, but the compressed file fits on a 3.5 floppy). Do a search
for opera.

They won't do the latest * stuff like hotflash. or whatever it is, but
for newspapers and other comp downloads should work fine. Also, Netscape
has its own decent html editor so you can make html files.

Quote:> --Myron.
> --
> Five boxes preserve our freedoms:  soap, ballot, witness, jury, and cartridge
> PhD EE (retired).

I'm an ex-scientist, PhD, Biology. retired or semiretired or just plain
tired.

Quote:>   "Barbershop" tenor.   CDL(PTX).   W0PBV.

W4PON

  (785) 539-4448

Quote:> NRA Life Member and Certified Instructor (Home Firearm Safety, Rifle, Pistol)

Good luck...

Art Sowers


SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://www.veryComputer.com/

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Marcus Hould » Wed, 09 Jul 2003 06:35:34



wrote the following to comp.os.msdos.misc:

Quote:

>>....[snip]....
>>....(I consider Win3.1 better than later
>>versions but there are a few new things out that you can't get SW for
>>under Win3.1, so, I just don't do that stuff). Linux is very nice, but it
>>....[snip]....

> Since Windoz Me presented me with its imfamous blue-screen-of-death, I've
> been considering reverting to 3.1

Windows 3.1 also supports the BSOD. It might not be as common as in Win9x,
but that's mainly because Win9x does a lot more, and with more bits to go
wrong. I had a few problems on my very old Win3.1 box when it would bomb out
to the DOS prompt with a bad DOS extender error. It only happened twice on
my Win95 box and both of those were down to me trying to reconfigure a
network card using a DOS utility from within Windows.

mh.
--

Sig temporarily unavailable.

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Paul O. BARTLET » Wed, 09 Jul 2003 08:42:47


On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Ted Davis wrote (excerpt):

Quote:>  <ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/>  This is the classic
> standard DOS freeware/shareware archive - they have hundreds of
> thousands of programs for real DOS.

    The last time I looked at SimTel in the editor directory, the index
file that gave one-liners on each of the applicaiton program files was
gone.  I haven't checked any of the other directories, but SimTel is a
fabulous resource for DOS.  (Even under 'doze 98 I am still using an
editor that I got off SimTel.)

--
Paul Bartlett
bartlett at smart.net
PGP key info in message headers

 
 
 

sleeping with the enemy

Post by Richard Stein » Wed, 09 Jul 2003 17:45:44


Here in comp.os.msdos.misc,

Quote:>Windows 3.1 also supports the BSOD.

It's called a UAE (I mean GPF <g>) in Windows 3.1, though.  :-)

--
 -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Eden Prairie, MN
    OS/2 + BeOS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
      Now running in text mode on a PPro/200.  Eat my dust, GUI freaks!
                 The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.