VivienM wrote on 2025-02-02, 00:46:
It's funny, I had the idea of trying one of the newer DOSes - there's no real reason to stick to MS-DOS I suppose.
Hi, one reason I'm often using MS-DOS 6.2x is that it is sort of a reference.
It is very compatible, most if not all DOS programs are MS-DOS 5/6 aware and
the supplied utilities (aka external commands) are available in MS-DOS 6.2x.
Especially if the supplemental disk had been installed.
That's what makes MS-DOS 6.2x so great, I think. It's compatible and feature complete.
Programs that rely on batch files will run correctly on MS-DOS 5/6, because the utilities support the / switches.
It also runs on emulators and PCs that have limited PC compatibility.
For example, MS-DOS 6.2x can be booted in PC-Ditto - inside from Steem emulator!
Here, MS-DOS 6.2x is more stable and quick than MS-DOS 2.11, even!
That's something! The only other DOS so nice is outdated PC-DOS 3.30, I think.
Anyway, Novell DOS 7 is nice because it ships with sophisticated software.
Novell had bought DR DOS back then because Novell Netware operating system was being based on DOS.
That's why Novell had such a big interest in owning a state-of-the-art DOS.
It needed a solid foundation for its networking products.
Novell DOS 7 had 286 chipset support, as well as a task-switcher and a preemptive task-manager for 386/486 PCs.
It featured an 32-Bit API for multitasking. New Deal Office 2000 still had special support for this built-in.
So it was fine for the common ATs of the mid-90s, the 286/386/486 family.
Of course, time moved on and there were many patches since the retail release.
Not sure how modern DOSes compare to it, thus. It's nolonger cutting-edge, perhaps. 🤷♂️
FreeDOS for example is still being worked on, but it doesn't look very polished and user-friendly.
It also doesn't try to improve DOS and invent new technologies.
DOSes like MS-DOS 6.2x or Novell DOS 7 had featured assistants that took users by the hand.
And then let's compare this with the ugly Linux installer of, say, FreeDOS. 😥
Utilities like PC-Tools or Norton Utilities were from 1990-1994 and had TUIs that looked very elegant and had used custom fonts to draw icons.
Even DOS Shell from MS-DOS 5 is prettier than what FreeDOS has to offer in terms of GUIs (or assistants).
It's like moving from suburb into a slum, by comparison, I think. But I'm getting a bit off-topic. Sorry. 😟
Hm. IBM PC-DOS 2000 seems to be most modern, I suppose. Owners of hot-rod PC/XT computers seem to value it, as well.
I've read positive comments about it at vcfed forums, I remember.
Edited.
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel
//My video channel//