Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 30th Aug 2012 17:43 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 533334
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: More irony (though more loosely related)
by zima on Thu 30th Aug 2012 23:06
in reply to "RE: More irony (though more loosely related)"
Irrelevant in the context of historical and "more loosely related" irony (you do understand the concept, right? Did you actually read even the title of my post?), NVM how "ran on top of DOS, just like Win 3.x or GEM" is 100% factual (why do you think I wrote "DOS"?) - and certainly goes against the usual "superior" narrative about all that the classic Mac OS supposedly was.
You remind me about those "bitter, broken and have a bunch of straws you are desperately clutching at [...] take a break and chill [...] proving to be a very sore loser" words that I read somewhere in this thread...
RE[3]: More irony (though more loosely related)
by henderson101 on Fri 31st Aug 2012 00:33
in reply to "RE[2]: More irony (though more loosely related)"
certainly goes against the usual "superior" narrative about all that the classic Mac OS supposedly was.
You understand very little about what they actually did. That much is clear. DRDOS was a DOS compatible OS, but it wasn't just a DOS clone. Do some research.
What they actually did was more akin to Windows 95.. the UI layer and shell ran as a user land process on a fully multitasking OS with drivers and a kernel. Again, DOS didn't really manage to do most of this till version 7, which was the basis of Windows 95.
You remind me about those "bitter, broken and have a bunch of straws you are desperately clutching at [...] take a break and chill [...] proving to be a very sore loser" words that I read somewhere in this thread...
Not really, because you don't actually seem to understand the basics of what they achieved. If all they did was make a little shell that just wrapped up DOS calls (like Windows 1.0), then maybe you'd be on to something. Read the capabilities of DRDOS, it was fcuking awesome sauce and made DOS (both MS and PC) look like a toy.





Member since:
2006-05-30
Oh dear. DRDOS is not MSDOS/PCDOS, you know that, right? DRDOS was way, way more advanced. Did you actually even read more than "system 7.1" and DOS? Most of the capabilities listed in that article didn't come to DOS till Windows 95.