中国DOS联盟

Yeah, yeah. At first I was all excited, but then thinking about the driver issue, I got unhappy. Linux has a big business opportunity now, so hardware manufacturers all develop corresponding drivers. DOS is outdated in people's minds, and businesses won't consider developing its drivers anymore. How to solve this problem? You can't ask users to install those outdated components, that's too unrealistic! We can't develop DOS drivers ourselves, can we?

DOS is the favorite of many software developers.
But FreeDOS is after all DOS, which is single-task and single-user.
Linux is multi-user and multi-task.

I am a loyal user of DOS. I think no matter how much it absorbs LINUX, we should keep the original flavor of DOS. This is the psychological complex of a person who loves DOS.

Inner quality is the most important, the same for people and OS.

It seems that brothers don't understand!
unix = tcp/ip
xwindows = tcp/ip 2.0
That concept is not a graphics system, but a network communication system
The life core of unix is in network communication, based on network, and it doesn't matter if there is a disk or not
dos is disk operation system, based on disk, and there's no need to mention network.

Waiting...

I think that DOS and WINDOWS should each perform their own duties, and no operating system should expect to be "perfect".

I am a final user who doesn't know much about the system. Just like what the person above said, how the system works, what its structure is, and whether it is complex or not doesn't matter to me because I don't understand. As long as it is easy to use and simple, and there are a large number of application software and games on it, that's enough. I think this is also the goal that every person developing an operating system pursues.
I love DOS! It is small and simple... In short, I don't want to see its decline. I am very happy to see your enthusiasm for DOS. The DOS I love will not decline. It will become better and more powerful, like a pupa transforming into a butterfly and flying high, being completely transformed.

The following is a quote from LanE at 15:43:22 on February 22, 2003:
That DOS is simpler than Linux is an irreplaceable advantage of DOS. You don't have to fully use those concepts of Linux. It's okay to just have drives C, D...

Friend, you are wrong. If drives C, D, E, etc. are good, then Windows wouldn't have to add the function of mounting file systems in NTFS. The only advantage of naming partitions with letters is easy understanding, but the biggest problem with this is inflexibility. If there are more than 23 partitions (A and B are assigned to floppy drives + one optical drive), then the extra partitions can't be accessed. Although Unix (Linux) is a bit harder to understand for ordinary users! But its flexibility is incomparable to DOS. It hides details (such as partition size and file system type). It can be placed anywhere in the system, etc. (If you are willing, go and experience it well, and you can feel the difference!) The simplicity of DOS is its advantage, but something that is too simple will become useless!
The problem that I often encounter when installing the Windows system personally is that there are two hard drives. When you install Windows on the slave drive, the default partition of Windows will become D: Although it is okay to use, it just looks unpleasant.

Personally, the only reason why DOS will be eliminated sooner or later is the original design idea. The original design idea of DOS, as a friend has said, is Disk Operation, but Unix is not. The design idea of Unix is object-oriented. It is easier to expand. In the early days, with few peripherals and not very widespread applications, this drawback of DOS didn't show up, but now it is gradually showing up.

Just purely personal daydreaming... If there are errors, please correct them...

Regarding the basic nature of LINUX, I think it is only suitable for servers, and many people also think so;
LINUX is difficult to use (in my opinion) and not suitable for home users.
And DOS is much easier than the LINUX SHELL in all aspects, so I think that DOS + XWINDOW should be a very good home system. And the most prominent thing about the "home system" I think is ease of use. Aren't all current applications developing in this direction (of course, also whether their functions are powerful or not)?

The application of DOS lies in its small size, single-tasking, and high reliability. Windows and Linux lie in the basis of an application platform. If it comes to stability and reliability, it must be inferior to the DOS system. Because the kernels of everyone are very different from the very beginning. We know that the extreme of program stability is no code. And this is obviously that DOS is stronger than the two. This is why DOS is the most common in handling critical tasks and single-tasking systems. Relatively speaking, DOS is better than some embedded OSes.

The following is the speech of makefool on September 19, 2003 at 13:31:27:
It seems that brothers don't understand!
unix = tcp/ip
xwindows = tcp/ip 2.0
That concept is not a graphics system, but a network communication system
The life core of unix is in network communication, based on network, and it doesn't matter if there is no disk
dos is disk operation system, based on disk, and there is no need to say anything about network

y What this person said is too accurate, to the point!

Now LINUX wants to combine UNIX and DOS into one, but so far, it still doesn't get rid of the shadow of UNIX. So it is still used on servers. For the general public users, it can only develop when the functions of X-windows and the development of third-party software are very good.

DOS will definitely step out of its historical stage! Although I play DOS very well! I still think so!

First of all, I would like to thank "China DOS Union's United DOS Forum" for providing me with such a rare opportunity!

I think: There are hundreds of millions of people who want to surpass the feeble ones! The important thing is to be sure to figure out the specific gap, and more importantly, to foresee its long-term goals. At least, one should also be able to grasp its short-term goals, such as the functions it can achieve in 2006.

The development of DOS will only have a greater space for development if it takes a different path. It is bound to take a different path!

In my opinion, Microsoft's medium-term goal is to achieve functions equivalent to those of a scientist's brain. Conservatively estimated, it will be in 2018. This should be a milestone in the evolution of computers. I know that almost 100% of people will not believe this prediction, just as fifteen years ago you didn't believe that you could chat with friends far in Africa while sitting in front of a computer at home.

I will use my possible abilities and financial resources to practice the above ideas.

In fact, I think the work that operating systems such as DOS, LINUX, WINDOWS, UNIX and others can accomplish is the same for users. None of them are perfect. We can clearly feel their existence and differences. And users don't need to distinguish what operating system they are using. Just as when we want to do an addition, we don't care whether it's abacus, calculator or something else. I just need to tell you the formula and you tell me the result, and the rest doesn't matter. He just needs to know whether it's correct and whether it's convenient. So, the future operating system will be a highly complex and highly fault-tolerant strange thing. Just like the evolution of organisms, from low level to high level, from simple to complex, this is the law. If DOS can't become a multi-tasking and multi-user system, then in the near future, it won't be able to exist anymore, or will exist alone.

Personally, I think DOS shouldn't compete with Windows on desktop systems. It should make use of its advantages such as small size, fast speed, rich software, and relatively simple operation to develop applications on mobile devices like PDAs, mobile phones, etc., so that it can shine again.