28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops - Palmtop

This is a discussion on 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops - Palmtop ; http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html I would have to agree with many of these. But I think DOS should always be used in conjunction with Windows instead of replacing it. But then again this depends on the scanario. As for me how much I ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

  1. 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html

    I would have to agree with many of these. But I think DOS should always
    be used in conjunction with Windows instead of replacing it. But then
    again this depends on the scanario.

    As for me how much I wish I would have known about the HP 200LX DOS
    palmtop PC (http://www.daniel-hertrich.de/200lx/) before I went Windows
    CE.

    Some CE screenshots

    http://johnw.freeshell.org/graphics/HPCbackground.BMP
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/graphics/hpc/pine.jpg
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/graphics/hpc/


    Having tested a HP 200LX I can vouch that this machine is really much
    better than the Jornada 720 for many uses. The Jornada 720 is really a
    nice little subnotebook that eats batteries faster than a SUV eats gas,
    cant be viewed in bright sunlight, and is a big bulky monster.

    Dont get me wrong Win CE palmtops and PocketPC's do have many extra
    advantages over a DOS machine. But perhaps these extras are better off
    being utilized on a laptop or full size desktop.

    The 200LX does kick butt and if you ever get a chance to try one, you
    wont disagree.

    They still continue to sell higher than many PocketPC and HPC models.


    John
    --
    Heb. 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and
    sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing
    asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and
    is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
    CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
    http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible/

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  2. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops



    "John the Baptist Jr." wrote in message
    news:johnw_94020-9700CD.12052029012006@News-West.newsfeeds.com...
    > http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html
    >
    > I would have to agree with many of these. But I think DOS should always
    > be used in conjunction with Windows instead of replacing it. But then
    > again this depends on the scanario.


    I'm sure there were people that didn't want to give up the horse and buggy
    either.



  3. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Here in alt.msdos,
    "Chance Hopkins" spake unto us, saying:


    >"John the Baptist Jr." wrote in message
    >news:johnw_94020-9700CD.12052029012006@News-West.newsfeeds.com...
    >
    >> http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html
    >>
    >> I would have to agree with many of these. But I think DOS should always
    >> be used in conjunction with Windows instead of replacing it. But then
    >> again this depends on the scanario.

    >
    >I'm sure there were people that didn't want to give up the horse and buggy
    >either.


    One of the reasons they still run their DOS programs in conjuction with
    a primitive platform like Windows instead of OS/2 or Linux. :-)

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
    WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

  4. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops


    "John the Baptist Jr." wrote in message
    news:johnw_94020-9700CD.12052029012006@News-West.newsfeeds.com...
    > http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html
    >
    >...
    > Dont get me wrong Win CE palmtops and PocketPC's do have many extra
    > advantages over a DOS machine. But perhaps these extras are better off
    > being utilized on a laptop or full size desktop.
    >


    Multitasking not withstanding? Do you even use your stylus?

    How about chucking the Pocket PCs and we all buy a MC10?

    I think that Operating systems are becoming too close to the applications,
    granted, but you have to be the poster child of change resistance.

    Now I have to go - I am trying to figure out yet another use for interrupt
    21...

    (BTW, was the crossposting really needed? Remember that quite a few people
    connect directly to the Microsoft server, which does not support the comp
    and alt groups. Hence orphaned conversations...)





  5. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    >> Dont get me wrong Win CE palmtops and PocketPC's do have many extra
    >> advantages over a DOS machine. But perhaps these extras are better off
    >> being utilized on a laptop or full size desktop.


    I have the best of both worlds. I use PocketDOS which runs almost all DOS
    apps on a WinCE or PocketPC
    machine.

    www.pocketdos.com

    Tom Lake



  6. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    John the Baptist Jr. wrote:
    > http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html


    > I would have to agree with many of these. But I think DOS should always
    > be used in conjunction with Windows instead of replacing it.
    >
    > John


    *** I tried that in the 1990s, but eventually came to realise that
    Windows was too unstable and interfered too much with my DOS work. That
    didn't count the fact that the Windows overhead was much higher to get
    the same job done and that it ran much slower to get the same job done.
    I realised that Windows simply wasn't necessary and dumped it.

    Richard Bonner
    http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/

  7. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Chance Hopkins wrote:

    > "John the Baptist Jr." wrote:
    > > http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html
    > >
    > > I would have to agree with many of these. But I think DOS should always
    > > be used in conjunction with Windows instead of replacing it.


    > I'm sure there were people that didn't want to give up the horse and buggy
    > either.


    *** This is true, but fortunately I was one of those that was able to
    give up that hoarse & bugger of an operating system called "Windows". (-:

    Richard Bonner
    http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/

  8. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Richard Steiner wrote:
    > Here in alt.msdos,
    > "Chance Hopkins" spake unto us, saying:
    > >I'm sure there were people that didn't want to give up the horse and buggy
    > >either.


    > One of the reasons they still run their DOS programs in conjuction with
    > a primitive platform like Windows instead of OS/2 or Linux. :-)
    > --
    > -Rich Steiner


    *** I have an OS/2 buddy. He swears by that system. His only complaint
    seems to be that not enough software is written for it.

    Richard Bonner
    http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/

  9. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops


    "Richard Bonner" wrote in message
    news:drt30c$eo8$1@News.Dal.Ca...
    > John the Baptist Jr. wrote:
    >> http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html

    >
    >> I would have to agree with many of these. But I think DOS should always
    >> be used in conjunction with Windows instead of replacing it.
    >>
    >> John

    >
    > *** I tried that in the 1990s, but eventually came to realise that
    > Windows was too unstable and interfered too much with my DOS work. That
    > didn't count the fact that the Windows overhead was much higher to get
    > the same job done and that it ran much slower to get the same job done.
    > I realised that Windows simply wasn't necessary and dumped it.



    I feel this pretty much sums up the entire linux fallacy, "I tried that in
    the 1990s". We aren't in the 90's. I hear this sort of thing again and
    again. People need to stop comparing linux to windows 95. I run linux
    (puppy), xp pro, a mac, ppc and a 2003 server. I've never really seen much
    of anything that I can do with one that I can't do with another.



  10. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Here in alt.msdos, ak621@chebucto.ns.ca (Richard Bonner) spake unto us, saying:

    >*** I have an OS/2 buddy. He swears by that system. His only complaint
    >seems to be that not enough software is written for it.


    It's lacking in some areas, not in others. Without its good DOS and
    Windows 16-bit support, though, it would probably not be viable for me.

    As it is, though, it keeps my interest in DOS programs alive! :-)

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
    WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

  11. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Here in alt.msdos,
    "Chance Hopkins" spake unto us, saying:

    >I feel this pretty much sums up the entire linux fallacy, "I tried that in
    >the 1990s". We aren't in the 90's. I hear this sort of thing again and
    >again. People need to stop comparing linux to windows 95. I run linux
    >(puppy), xp pro, a mac, ppc and a 2003 server. I've never really seen much
    >of anything that I can do with one that I can't do with another.


    Linux can be very nice if you have a need for one of the customized
    variants that folks are creating (LiveCDs, firewall/routers, etc.).

    It's also (legally) inexpensive. :-)

    I could see using Windows XP here at home, for example, but the cost of
    licenses for 8-10 machines is prohibitive. Linux, on the other hand,
    is well within my budget.

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
    WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

  12. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Its odd, isn't it.....

    Linux takes effort to install and configure. You have to understand all the
    different varieties and how the different apps fit together. But once that
    has been done, you can implement it for free on many more desktops.

    While Windows, you get a CD and put it in and thats it. But you have to buy
    a new license for each machine you put it on.

    So, why is it that Linux tends to be run on the 1's and 2's desktop numbers,
    while Windows gets run on the 100's and 1000's??

    Well it seems a little odd to me. . . . there must be more too it
    somewhere??


    Like support and security and stability and application availability and
    ease of use and ease of training and compatibility and


    "Richard Steiner" wrote in message
    news:7at4DpHpv25N092yn@visi.com...
    > Here in alt.msdos,
    > "Chance Hopkins" spake unto us, saying:
    >
    >>I feel this pretty much sums up the entire linux fallacy, "I tried that in
    >>the 1990s". We aren't in the 90's. I hear this sort of thing again and
    >>again. People need to stop comparing linux to windows 95. I run linux
    >>(puppy), xp pro, a mac, ppc and a 2003 server. I've never really seen much
    >>of anything that I can do with one that I can't do with another.

    >
    > Linux can be very nice if you have a need for one of the customized
    > variants that folks are creating (LiveCDs, firewall/routers, etc.).
    >
    > It's also (legally) inexpensive. :-)
    >
    > I could see using Windows XP here at home, for example, but the cost of
    > licenses for 8-10 machines is prohibitive. Linux, on the other hand,
    > is well within my budget.
    >
    > --
    > -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA
    > USA
    > OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist
    > Heaven!
    > WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    > The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.




  13. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    On Fri 03 Feb 2006 01:29:10a, "Chris Jordan" ,
    wrote:

    > Its odd, isn't it.....
    >
    > Linux takes effort to install and configure. You have to understand
    > all the different varieties and how the different apps fit together.
    > But once that has been done, you can implement it for free on many
    > more desktops.
    >
    > While Windows, you get a CD and put it in and thats it. But you have
    > to buy a new license for each machine you put it on.
    >
    > So, why is it that Linux tends to be run on the 1's and 2's desktop
    > numbers, while Windows gets run on the 100's and 1000's??
    >
    > Well it seems a little odd to me. . . . there must be more too it
    > somewhere??
    >
    >
    > Like support and security and stability and application availability
    > and ease of use and ease of training and compatibility and


    And the fact that Windows is pre-installed on just about every computer
    you can buy might have just a *little* to do with it, don't you think?
    M$ learned to freeze others out with OEM tie-ins a *long* time ago. But
    it's changing and we'll see how it all plays out in the next five years
    or so.

    --
    RonB
    "There's a story there...somewhere"

  14. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    > Its odd, isn't it.....
    >
    > Linux takes effort to install and configure. You have to understand all the
    > different varieties and how the different apps fit together. But once that
    > has been done, you can implement it for free on many more desktops.
    >
    > While Windows, you get a CD and put it in and thats it. But you have to buy
    > a new license for each machine you put it on.


    Actually, that's grossly unfair. Installing Windows, these days,
    tends to be greatly more complex and error-prone than installing
    Linux.

    > So, why is it that Linux tends to be run on the 1's and 2's desktop numbers,
    > while Windows gets run on the 100's and 1000's??
    >
    > Well it seems a little odd to me. . . . there must be more too it
    > somewhere??


    There's the consideration that people don't "put in the CD" and
    install Windows, because PC vendors do it once, in-house, and then
    make duplicate disk images for each PC they sell, so that users have
    no idea whether it is easy or difficult to install Windows...
    --
    (format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "gmail.com")
    http://linuxdatabases.info/info/spreadsheets.html
    "How much more helpful could I be than to provide you with the
    appropriate e-mail address? I could engrave it on a clue-by-four and
    deliver it to you in Chicago, I suppose." -- Seen on Slashdot...

  15. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Chance Hopkins wrote:

    > "Richard Bonner" wrote:
    > > John the Baptist Jr. wrote:
    > >> http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/DOS-Fal.html

    > >
    > >> I would have to agree with many of these. But I think DOS should always
    > >> be used in conjunction with Windows instead of replacing it.
    > >>
    > >> John

    > >
    > > *** I tried that in the 1990s, but eventually came to realise that
    > > Windows was too unstable and interfered too much with my DOS work. That
    > > didn't count the fact that the Windows overhead was much higher to get
    > > the same job done and that it ran much slower to get the same job done.
    > > I realised that Windows simply wasn't necessary and dumped it.


    > I feel this pretty much sums up the entire linux fallacy, "I tried that in
    > the 1990s". We aren't in the 90's. I hear this sort of thing again and
    > again. People need to stop comparing linux to windows 95.


    *** Twice burned...

    To bring this up to date (Vista aside), I see people running XP with
    the same, although fewer, sorts of problems. Again though, we still have
    all that overhead, and the constant upgrades, virus problems and
    difficulties running DOS programs.


    > I run linux
    > (puppy), xp pro, a mac, ppc and a 2003 server. I've never really seen much
    > of anything that I can do with one that I can't do with another.


    *** I agree. I have Linux, too, but only run it for post-2003 .pdf and
    MS-WORD files. I cannot seem to get the same advantages with it as I have
    with DOS. In particular, I want more command-line access to programs
    without all the GUI overhead. Some Linux programs are written this way,
    but too many follow the "oh, everyone wants to use a mouse" attitude of
    software authoring. )-:

    Now to be fair, I don't yet know all there is to know about the Linux
    command line. In fact, I would be pleased if someone might point me to a
    Linux command-line tutorial. None of the Linux books I have seen say much,
    if anything, about the command line.

    Richard Bonner
    http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/

  16. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Chris Jordan wrote:
    > Its odd, isn't it.....


    > Linux takes effort to install and configure. You have to understand all the
    > different varieties and how the different apps fit together. But once that
    > has been done, you can implement it for free on many more desktops.


    > While Windows, you get a CD and put it in and thats it. But you have to buy
    > a new license for each machine you put it on.


    > So, why is it that Linux tends to be run on the 1's and 2's desktop numbers,
    > while Windows gets run on the 100's and 1000's??


    *** Marketing is part of it. However, this is changing as more & more
    businesses and government offices switch to Linux. The most recent
    converts: the Danish school system and the state of Massachusetts. (I
    don't know if the latter has implemented the change yet, though.)


    > Well it seems a little odd to me. . . . there must be more too it
    > somewhere??


    > Like support and security and stability and application availability and
    > ease of use and ease of training and compatibility and...


    *** Linux support is available via Sun Microsystems, for one. More will
    come as Linux makes further inroads. Windows support was once at this
    level, too.

    Richard Bonner
    http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/

  17. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Here in alt.msdos, "Chris Jordan"
    spake unto us, saying:

    >"Richard Steiner" wrote
    >
    >> Linux can be very nice if you have a need for one of the customized
    >> variants that folks are creating (LiveCDs, firewall/routers, etc.).
    >>
    >> It's also (legally) inexpensive. :-)

    >
    >Its odd, isn't it.....


    Not really.

    >Linux takes effort to install and configure.


    A LiveCD like DSL (Damn Small Linux), Knoppix, or Ubuntu requires no
    installation at all by definition, although some provide that option,
    some allow for the installing of additional packages to RAMdisk from
    external servers, etc.

    Even qemu-driven distros like DSL (Damn Small Linux, which has a qemu-
    driven version called "embedded" which unzips and then runs in a virtual
    machine under Windows from a single .bat file) has almost no install
    requirements.

    The firewall version of Linux I use (BrazilFW, formerly Coyote Linux)
    has a Windows wizard which asks you questions and then creates a disk
    for you containing the preconfigured OS.

    No, not much effort. Some knowledge for configuration if things like
    dhcp don't work initially, but in my experience that's rare.

    >You have to understand all the different varieties and how the different
    >apps fit together.


    No you don't. You just have to learn (probably by asking someone or by
    reading information on web sites and magazines) about the one variant
    that might do something you want.

    The other ones are there for future reference, yes, and in time it may
    be nice to compare what you know against a few others which you don't
    know yet, but you don't have to learn anything about them at all in
    order to use the first one. Just learn that one. Keep it simple.

    >But once that has been done, you can implement it for free on many
    >more desktops.


    Usually true. Or servers.

    >While Windows, you get a CD and put it in and thats it. But you have
    >to buy a new license for each machine you put it on.


    Correct. For businesses that can write off the expense, it isn't a big
    deal, but for hobbyists like me who have multi-machine LANs the cost is
    a much larger issue.

    >So, why is it that Linux tends to be run on the 1's and 2's desktop
    >numbers, while Windows gets run on the 100's and 1000's??


    Preloads.
    Lack of knowledge.
    Inertia.
    Perceived (and sometimes actual) lack of software.
    Fear of the unknown.
    Misinformation.

    Those are all factors. You seem to contribute to the latter, BTW, which
    is a shame. I expect education from the experienced, not obfuscation.

    >Well it seems a little odd to me. . . . there must be more too it
    >somewhere??
    >
    >Like support and security and stability and application availability and
    >ease of use and ease of training and compatibility and


    I would say (based on over a decade of experience with each) that Linux
    is at least on par with Windows as far as available support, security,
    stability, and ease of use/training is concerned.

    Application availability is an issue for Linux in some cases. For
    many, though, workarounds like Wine or alternatives are available.

    Compatibility? Depends on what you're talking about. I can even run
    some modern Windows software on my ancient OS/2 box via Odin, and I've
    heard that Wine is better (I've not had to spend much time with Wine
    for server matters, since I use Linux mainly for file serving here).

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
    WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

  18. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    Here in alt.msdos, ak621@chebucto.ns.ca (Richard Bonner)
    spake unto us, saying:

    >*** Linux support is available via Sun Microsystems, for one.


    IBM also supports Linux heavily, both in terms of support programs for
    businesses, and in terms of code for various open source projects up to
    and including the Linux kernel.

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
    OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
    WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

  19. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.palmtops.]
    On Fri, 3 Feb 2006 14:30:06 +0000 (UTC),
    Richard Bonner wrote:

    > ...I would be pleased if someone might point me to a Linux
    > command-line tutorial. None of the Linux books I have seen say
    > much, if anything, about the command line.


    Many of the books on Linux assume a GUI interface, but the system
    administration books for Unix and Linux with Evi Nemith as first
    author are written entirely from a command line persepctive. On
    top of that, they're very well done, and a pleasure to read.

    --
    Theodore (Ted) Heise Bloomington, IN, USA

  20. Re: 28 DOS fallacies. DOS palmtop vs. Win CE/PPC palmtops

    On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 10:04:48 -0500,
    Theodore Heise wrote:
    > ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.palmtops.]
    > On Fri, 3 Feb 2006 14:30:06 +0000 (UTC),
    > Richard Bonner wrote:
    >
    >> ...I would be pleased if someone might point me to a Linux
    >> command-line tutorial. None of the Linux books I have seen say
    >> much, if anything, about the command line.

    >
    > Many of the books on Linux assume a GUI interface, but the system
    > administration books for Unix and Linux with Evi Nemith as first
    > author are written entirely from a command line persepctive. On
    > top of that, they're very well done, and a pleasure to read.


    Sorry, that spelling is Nemeth.

    --
    Theodore (Ted) Heise Bloomington, IN, USA

+ Reply to Thread