w-bethf@microsoft.UUCP (Elizabeth FOURNIER) (06/29/90)
In article <3130010@hplsla.HP.COM> davidr@hplsla.HP.COM (David M. Reed) writes: >Personally, I would not recommend, at this point, that you widely implement >MSWindows for your MSDOS environment, considering your applications. > >The general guideline I have been developing and suggesting is: > > If most of your work can be done with MSWindows applications, using no > more than 2 standard DOS applications, then MSWindows 3 is a great > and welcome interface. > This is interesting to hear. I'm a Windows developer, and I develop from inside Windows. This means that at any given time, I am running both Windows and DOS applications. I have my compiler in a DOS window, my DOS editor (Brief or vi) in a DOS full screen, and usually Windows Word for documentation and maybe a couple of help files up. While I admit I may have a higher-end machine than most (a Compaq 386, 20MHz machine with 5M RAM), I don't find I have any problems with my DOS applications coexisting with my Windows applications. And it allows me to run multiple DOS applications at once, something I couldn't do before I switched. >not work well, if at all, under MSWindows. You do not want to be having to >go in and out of MSWindows. It takes too much disc space and cpu and memory >resources to be, in my opinion, justifiable UNLESS you can live in it >virtually all the time. > This I can agree with. Switching continuously between DOS and Windows is a pain, because Windows does not boot up instantaneously. I don't find this to be a problem though, since you can do anything you can do in DOS in Windows. If nothing else, just start up a full screen DOS session from within Windows! ..beth -- My opinions are just that. MINE! And OPINIONS! "Singed a bit, were you?" -- Wesley "No, you?" -- Buttercup