China DOS Union

Such a good post, those who pass by must support it.

"I say DOS, I'm still working under DOS"
This is good, me too. Many years ago, I made a DOS program on a 386 machine, and it's still used in the unit now. The Chinese character system is UCDOS. The current machines don't support it, so we can only use old machines. I don't have time to upgrade to WIN. It's really useful. Everyone thinks about the program (dealing with databases, more than 100,000 records) made on a machine with a main frequency of 40 MHz, 2 MB of memory, and a 210 MB hard disk (this number is guaranteed to be correct, it's M, not G). Except for DOS, who can do it.
I also like DOS.

Hey.
It seems that to learn DOS well,
you also need to know many languages.

DOS is powerful, much more flexible than other operating systems.

Originally posted by jha334201553 at 2008-12-14 12:26:
DOS is very powerful and much more flexible than other operating systems

Agreed——!
But it's hard to say it's very powerful, but it's indeed flexible.

After reading the esteemed posts of the experts, I really feel inferior! All along, I've been groping my way forward by myself. My DOS fervor was eroded by the academic work in high school. At most, I did some slides and such during computer classes! I had a short encounter with it in junior high school! Then in college, I picked it up a bit, but the inspiration from back then is gone! Currently, I can only write some batch scripts, and they're not even concise! Later, I shifted to computer booting! (grub isolinux dosmenu bcdw ezboot... iso hd fd) I hope that in the future, some expert can talk about perfectly unifying these three! I'll learn more from everyone in the future....

DOS is very easy to use and quick to learn

DOS is too old, 16-bit, single-tasking. Now even embedded systems are 32-bit, and I think DOS is no good. Unless a new kernel is rewritten. Maybe some people say it's simple, but actually I think it's crude. The functions can't meet the needs with today's technology. Don't say it's enough for implementing some proprietary technology, that's just wishful thinking. For general special equipment, using special software is fine, which not only has fast execution speed, high security, strong stability, but using an operating system is unnecessary. And for something like the GX system you mentioned, using Linux or 2000 systems is more efficient. Unless you rewrite a DOS kernel, of course we are happy to see that. Then China will have a truly own operating system.

Ashamed, although I got a computer at home 8 or 9 years later than the original poster and directly came into contact with DOS, so far I only know a few DOS commands... Although I'm still in primary school.

Master, I've only used computers for fifteen years too.

For embedded and engineering control, stability is the most important. One of the determining factors for stability is time. DOS is over 30 years old, just like me. At 30, one is established and in the prime. Windows and Linux are still in their youth, full of vigor and innovation, but not stable. If we say Windows will be stable, we can only draw a conclusion at least after 10 more years.

I was in 2001. When I was in junior three, I only went online a few times.

Windows and Linux running on non-standard single-board computers always encounter inexplicable problems. When checked, it's related to the OS kernel, and you can only wait for the vendor...
DOS is easy! Just track it all the way down!

The LZ is really amazing. I started playing DOS when I was still in diapers, but I also really like the quick and simple operation interface of DOS.