Linux and DOS both have character-based interfaces, but their positioning is different. Let me give an example: things like multimedia and graphics functions—can Linux compare with DOS in that regard? But Linux's networking functions are something DOS cannot compare with. Although Linux's command-line capabilities are strong, they are quite complex and hard to learn. For example, most full-screen software under DOS (such as EDIT.COM, etc.) supports mouse and menu operations, while most full-screen software under Linux (such as the famous VIM, etc.) does not support the mouse or pull-down menus, and almost all of it can only be operated with the keyboard (software under X-Window, this cross-platform GUI, is of course an exception; besides, X-WIN has a DOS version). In a word, their positioning is not quite the same. Linux is suited to networking, especially high-end servers, as well as some advanced users, while DOS is more suitable for personal computers.
In the past, it was the world of the commercial software MS-DOS and Unix. As a result, MS-DOS was used more on personal computers, while Unix was used more on servers. In the future, it will be the world of the GNU GPL free software FreeDOS and Linux, but their positioning is also different (similar to the positioning of MS-DOS and Unix above).
Wengier - 新DOS时代
欢迎大家来到我的“新DOS时代”网站,里面有各类DOS软件和资料,地址:
http://wendos.mycool.net/
E-Mail & MSN: wengierwu AT hotmail.com (最近比较忙,有事请联系DOSroot和雨露,谢谢!)
