I've been on this forum for quite a long time now, and I've learned a lot. At least before, I had never thought about developing DOS. But here, I saw the enthusiasm for developing DOS, so I ended up with some thoughts of my own. I'm posting them here—just personal opinions, just something to look at.
As an operating system, DOS naturally has its own place. Not too many years ago, DOS and computers were almost the same thing in meaning. If you didn't understand DOS, you couldn't really say you understood computers. But now, systems like WINDOWS and LINUX have all surpassed DOS in status. The reasons are nothing more than that WINDOWS is simple and easy to use, attractive and friendly, while LINUX has powerful networking functions (all UNIX-like systems have this trait), and they are all multitasking, which is also extremely important. Think about it carefully: being able to make this post while listening to music, maybe also copying some files, and having QQ open to chat with friends—no matter what, that's better than just making a post, right? (Under DOS, maybe you can listen to music while going online, but you still can't copy things or open other programs at the same time, can you?) It can be said that using DOS lowers a person's efficiency, because at any given moment only one task can be completed, so the waiting time becomes very long, wasting people's time (even with TSRs, there is still a lot of waiting). So DOS was very successful in the past, when computer resources were precious and it was an era centered on the computer itself, but now the situation is different.
So if DOS is to be developed, multitasking absolutely must be supported. That would require rewriting the kernel, or at least making a system similar to WINDOWS9X. Only then can those of us who like DOS proudly say that we are using DOS to get online, listen to music, process files... and also proudly say that whatever WINDOWS can do, DOS can do too!!
As for multi-user support, for many individual PC users it isn't really all that necessary, but security definitely has to be considered, and that is because of the development of networking.
The development of networking has raised computer applications to a new level. What a computer without a network is like compared with one that has networking—I believe I don't even need to say it, everyone understands. But the trouble of going online under DOS, and how weak the functions are, everyone knows that too. No matter what, this is something that must be solved. And this also requires rewriting the kernel, or making very powerful programs to support it.
So personally, I feel that continuing to discuss MSDOS is not very meaningful. At most it is only useful for solving problems in today's WINDOWS systems. For many people, that is enough, but for a group whose purpose is to develop DOS, it is far from enough.
As for FreeDOS, since I haven't used it myself, I don't have many opinions. But its code is open, so we can study it, and it is also strongly compatible with MSDOS, so discussion of it ought to be greatly increased.
As for the development of DOS, it has to be developed from the fundamental core. It's not enough just to discuss applications of MSDOS, or simply make DOS boot disks. And as for discussions about what programs can save a little more memory, I am doubtful about how much meaning that really has.
I don't have much skill, and the above are only some of my personal views. Everyone can just take a casual look.
PS: It's rare for me to be serious for once, so I hope nobody flames me... ：）
As an operating system, DOS naturally has its own place. Not too many years ago, DOS and computers were almost the same thing in meaning. If you didn't understand DOS, you couldn't really say you understood computers. But now, systems like WINDOWS and LINUX have all surpassed DOS in status. The reasons are nothing more than that WINDOWS is simple and easy to use, attractive and friendly, while LINUX has powerful networking functions (all UNIX-like systems have this trait), and they are all multitasking, which is also extremely important. Think about it carefully: being able to make this post while listening to music, maybe also copying some files, and having QQ open to chat with friends—no matter what, that's better than just making a post, right? (Under DOS, maybe you can listen to music while going online, but you still can't copy things or open other programs at the same time, can you?) It can be said that using DOS lowers a person's efficiency, because at any given moment only one task can be completed, so the waiting time becomes very long, wasting people's time (even with TSRs, there is still a lot of waiting). So DOS was very successful in the past, when computer resources were precious and it was an era centered on the computer itself, but now the situation is different.
So if DOS is to be developed, multitasking absolutely must be supported. That would require rewriting the kernel, or at least making a system similar to WINDOWS9X. Only then can those of us who like DOS proudly say that we are using DOS to get online, listen to music, process files... and also proudly say that whatever WINDOWS can do, DOS can do too!!
As for multi-user support, for many individual PC users it isn't really all that necessary, but security definitely has to be considered, and that is because of the development of networking.
The development of networking has raised computer applications to a new level. What a computer without a network is like compared with one that has networking—I believe I don't even need to say it, everyone understands. But the trouble of going online under DOS, and how weak the functions are, everyone knows that too. No matter what, this is something that must be solved. And this also requires rewriting the kernel, or making very powerful programs to support it.
So personally, I feel that continuing to discuss MSDOS is not very meaningful. At most it is only useful for solving problems in today's WINDOWS systems. For many people, that is enough, but for a group whose purpose is to develop DOS, it is far from enough.
As for FreeDOS, since I haven't used it myself, I don't have many opinions. But its code is open, so we can study it, and it is also strongly compatible with MSDOS, so discussion of it ought to be greatly increased.
As for the development of DOS, it has to be developed from the fundamental core. It's not enough just to discuss applications of MSDOS, or simply make DOS boot disks. And as for discussions about what programs can save a little more memory, I am doubtful about how much meaning that really has.
I don't have much skill, and the above are only some of my personal views. Everyone can just take a casual look.
PS: It's rare for me to be serious for once, so I hope nobody flames me... ：）
