China DOS Union

Using UBUNTU 8.04, for home use, not playing games. Currently, can watch PPS in TOTEM, can also chat on Q, a very powerful FIREFOX browser, and even the input method that I used to not be able to accept is now used quite well.

A single sentence, very unaccustomed...

Work involves using DOS and Linux, and I'm studying hard.

Originally posted by zhangwencheng at 2009-2-15 02:32:
Comparison of the recent development of DOS and Linux
Linux was born in the early 1990s of the 20th century, became famous at the end of the 1990s and began to be actually used by many people. The famous "open source" movement has made new L...

I also came from the DOS era, but I think the article transferred by building 222 is really misleading. It can be seen that the author is indeed very familiar with and loves DOS, but since this post is discussing Linux, I also want to comment.

"The number of DOS software is quite large, at least hundreds of thousands (for example, there are more than 40,000 DOS viruses)."
Is even a virus being taken as something to be proud of? This is really the first time I've heard such a statement.
The large number of viruses can only indicate one thing: DOS has no security at all.

"DOS is the most suitable for individual users. It not only has low requirements and strong practicality, but also its overall functions are not worse than Linux."
Here, Linux is considered as a certain Linux distribution in a broad sense; otherwise, there is no such thing as "function" when just comparing kernels.
Don't compare the graphical interface, otherwise it's bullying DOS.
But comparing the command line, it's even more bullying DOS. The command line functions of Unix/Linux are extremely powerful, far beyond DOS. You can understand it by looking at shell programming.
In terms of application software, I don't know if the author's statement "at least hundreds of thousands" is verifiable. For Linux, taking Gentoo as an example, there are currently more than 10,000 software packages in the portage tree. These software almost cover all uses you can imagine.
The most bullying thing is, 1. You can install a virtual machine under Linux to simulate DOS, but the reverse is not possible. 2. A new machine cannot physically install DOS. Even if it is installed (such as FreeDOS), you can't handle the drivers.

"Overlord Spear - Memory Management"
Linux can manage extremely large memory (64G or even more), while DOS is still playing with segment-based memory management?

"The Windows 9x that everyone usually uses is just a large program under DOS."
Windows 9x uses DOS as a bootloader, but it cannot be said to be just a large program under DOS (this can only be said about Win 3.x).

"Windows is a multitasking operating environment, but it imposes much higher constraints and restrictions on program writing than DOS."
It is necessary to impose constraints and restrictions on programs. This is something that an operating system should do, and something that DOS has not been able to do (because some people think that DOS cannot be regarded as a strictly operating system). Traditional DOS allows APPs to directly operate hardware, and there is not much memory management for processes (loading into memory, making a jump, and the rest is all up to the APP to be self-conscious), so the stability is extremely poor, and security is all up to self-consciousness. Windows' current security is already considered good. Of course, Unix/Linux is better in this regard.
I have read the source code of the memory management of Linux 2.4 kernel. It is really comprehensive and designed very exquisitely. It is completely not at the same level as a system like DOS that cares about nothing.


In conclusion, I personally don't think that DOS (no matter which one, even the latest FreeDOS) can be comparable to Linux in any aspect.
Of course, DOS is still useful, especially for those who use Windows. When the system has major problems, occasionally you can use Dos to repair some problems.
For Linux users, I can only say that DOS is useless because Linux is much better in all aspects.

The usability of Linux is not strong, so the general public generally does not choose it.

Thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up