jpanneko@cedar.pfc.forestry.ca (Jack Pannekoek) (05/07/91)
Comment: I am a newcomer to news and have been reading many of the newsgroups with significant pc, database and applications content. This is my first foray into actually sending a message and opening myself up to constructive flaming. While I officially (get paid for) work with VAX/VMS and now UNIX (a la ULTRIX), I also (as many of you seem to) do some moonlighting. Some of the latter involves micro database design including the development of a couple of my own vertical products. I started with DBASE III+ but some ran into its many limitations and migrated to FOXPLUS and now FOXPRO for reasons of price, performance and a better language. About 4 years ago I ran into a need for a multi point of access mechanism for my applications. LAN's were too expensive, UNIX was too expensive and ugly and cheap/zero slot LAN's were too slow. I ended out going the multi-user PC-MOS route (in 1987) as the most cost and performance effective solution to multi-user DOS and got multi-tasking to boot. As a development environment, I have found it to be a sometimes rocky (as always - compatibility problems) but overall extremely productive solution. PC-MOS seems to have matured to the point of being no worse than DESQVIEW or any of the other multi-tasking (single user) DOS environments. In fact I have found its multi-processing efficiency to be superior to most of the other DOS multi-tasking environments. Question: There seems to be very little mention in any of the newsgroups that I have been reading (comp.databases, comp.os.misc, comp.os.msdos."*", comp.sys.ibm."*" and a few others) of multi-user DOS technology. Am I really on the lunatic fringe, am I missing a newsgroup or are there other closet multi-user/multi-tasking DOS people out there?? For environemnts where UNIX system support is hard to come by and all those DOS programs are so friendly and familiar, is not a multi-user DOS environment a feasable alternative or am I missing something with all the money and time I have saved myself and others?? With Multi-user DRDOS (previously Concurrent DOS/386), VM-386, PC-MOS/386, a multi-user version of OS/2 etc. to choose from I would have expected somewhat more interaction on this subject. -- Jack Pannekoek - Science Computer Analyst Internet: jpanneko@PFC.Forestry.CA
userAKDU@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Al Dunbar) (05/08/91)
In article <1991May6.213439.1282@cedar.pfc.forestry.ca>, jpanneko@cedar.pfc.forestry.ca (Jack Pannekoek) writes: >Comment: > >I am a newcomer to news and have been reading many of the newsgroups <<< multiple deletions >>> > >Question: > >There seems to be very little mention in any of the newsgroups that I >have been reading (comp.databases, comp.os.misc, comp.os.msdos."*", >comp.sys.ibm."*" and a few others) of multi-user DOS technology. Am >I really on the lunatic fringe, am I missing a newsgroup or are there >other closet multi-user/multi-tasking DOS people out there?? For >environemnts where UNIX system support is hard to come by and all >those DOS programs are so friendly and familiar, is not a multi-user >DOS environment a feasable alternative or am I missing something with >all the money and time I have saved myself and others?? One reason could be that this (at least as I see it) is comp.os.msdos. -------------------+------------------------------------------- Al Dunbar | Edmonton, Alberta | Disclaimer: "I disclaim disclaimers" CANADA | -------------------+-------------------------------------------