berrone@yragael.inria.fr (Jean-Pierre Berrone) (05/23/91)
Has anybody tried to compare 4DOS and MSDOS 5.0 ?
plim@hpsgwp.sgp.hp.com (Peter Lim) (05/24/91)
/ berrone@yragael.inria.fr (Jean-Pierre Berrone) / 9:56 pm May 23, 1991 / writes: $ Has anybody tried to compare 4DOS and MSDOS 5.0 ? $ I am trying to get the 2 of them to work together. The last I tried, Windows behaved a little erratic when I tried to open DOS sessions (this is with 4DOS in UMB). User interface-wise, I think 4DOS is much better. After reading sorted directories from 4DOS, the unsorted ones from DOS 5.0 looks messy. Not to mention file name completion etc. etc. .... Regards, ___o``\________________________________________________ ___ __ _ _ Peter Lim. V````\ @ @ . .. ... .- -> 76 MIPS at under US$20K !! --- -- - - /.------------------------------------------------ === == = = >--_// . .. ... .- -> 57 MIPS at under US$12K !! `' . If you guessed SUN, IBM or DEC, you are wrong ! E-mail: plim@hpsgwg.HP.COM Snail-mail: Hewlett Packard Singapore, Tel: (065)-279-2289 (ICDS, ICS) Telnet: 520-2289 1150 Depot Road, Singapore 0410. #include <standard_disclaimer.hpp>
wales@lrcsnl.enet.dec.com (David Wales) (05/25/91)
berrone@yragael.inria.fr (Jean-Pierre Berrone) writes... > Has anybody tried to compare 4DOS and MSDOS 5.0 ? There's nothing to compare, they are complimentary products in the same way as 4DOS has been with all earlier releases of MS-DOS. As far as working together is concerned, I'm running 4DOS 3.03 with MS-DOS 5.0 and all is well. -- ================================================================================ | David Wales (VK2KWD) Sydney, Australia | Internet: wales@lrcsnl.enet.dec.com | | | FIDOnet: 3:712/517 (My Other Half) | | "Only 36 years 'till retirement!" | UUCP: decwrl!lrcsnl.enet!wales | | | | | Opinions expressed are mine and | Voice: (61) 2 561-7334 (Work) | | mine only! | FAX: (61) 2 561-7441 | ================================================================================
blaise@kira.UUCP (Christopher Blaise) (05/28/91)
From article <11425@mirsa.inria.fr>, by berrone@yragael.inria.fr (Jean-Pierre Berrone): > > Has anybody tried to compare 4DOS and MSDOS 5.0 ? Well, I'm running 4DOS under MSDOS 5.0...does that count? :) MSDOS 5.0 commands are nice, but not nearly as nice as 4DOS (3.03)... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Christopher Blaise - blaise@emily.uvm.edu "I just wanna be loved... ]]]]]]]]]]]]] Fido: 1:325/107 is that so WRONG?!" -------------------------------------------------------------------------
orenalex@bimacs.BITNET (oren alex) (05/29/91)
In article <11425@mirsa.inria.fr> berrone@yragael.inria.fr (Jean-Pierre Berrone) writes: > > Has anybody tried to compare 4DOS and MSDOS 5.0 ? Silly! You don't COMPARE those products, you COMBINE them! The combination of dos 5.0 + 4dos is >-great-< I'd really wish you people stop asking for a comparison of DOS vs 4DOS. DOS is an operating system (some may dispute this...) 4DOS is a command interpreter that runs on top of DOS and replaces COMMAND.COM Asking to compare the two is like asking to compare UNIX and csh. 4dos is vastly superior to command.com, it has more commands, more features, and can use swapping (disk/ramdisk/EMS/XMS) to take less memory. The only feature COMMAND.COM on dos 5.0 has that 4DOS has not is the LOADHI command (pretty usefull). HOWEVER - if you use a 3rd party memory manager (like QEMM) you can use it's loadhigh features instead (QEMM's loadhi is better than DOS's). 4dos is shareware so you can try it yourself and buy it only if you decide to continue using it. And you will! Bye, Alex.