Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: COMP - Goodbye DOS

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Thanks for the thoughts.  The crashes I get usually involve WIN95 burping up when
running WIN95 beta software and the like.  I have all the DOS apps on the WIN95
machine, too, exactly  as you described.  But it's very comforting to have a fall
back.  And with my setup I can plot, print, and fax or whatever simultaneously
without fear or any loss of processor power.  And I actually do this often towards
the end of a job as I rush it out the door.  It's just seems each OS has required
a new PC to make the best use and I'm too cheap to cast off the old hardware.

NT has sounded good for a long time.  Just don't want to upgrade what I have or
invest in yet another PC.  At least not until the end of my typical 3-year cycle
(4 in twelve years and I just recently cast off my old 8086).

Caldwell, Stan wrote:

> Mark:

> I have more than 200 engineering applications that were written for DOS,
> and nearly 50 that were written for Windows 3.X.  With only one
> exception, they all run just fine under Windows 95, and most also run
> under Windows NT.  The sole exception is STAAD3, but it never ran very
> well in it's intended environment either.
> To run a DOS program in Windows 95, simply set it up with a shortcut,
> then right click on the shortcut and carefully set the properties.
> Generally use the defaults, except select "full-screen", "close on
> exit", and under advanced, select "prevent MS-DOS programs from
> detecting Windows".  If you want more specific instructions, just drop
> me a note.  If there are several inquiries, I'll post a complete set of
> instructions to the Listserv.
> I agree that Windows 95 is not entirely stable, but it is much better
> than any of it's predecessors.  If you are getting more than one or two
> crashes per month, you need to scandisk, defrag, and look seriously for
> hardware and software (DLL) conflicts.  If this is not acceptable, then
> step up to it's big brother, Windows NT 4.0.  You can make Windows NT
> crash, but you really have to work to do it!
> Best Regards,
> Stan Caldwell, P.E.
> Dallas, Texas
> ************************************************************************
> ********
> The more you run over a dead cat,
> the flatter it gets!
>                      ...anonymous
> ************************************************************************
> ********
> >----------
> >From:  Mark Codispoti[SMTP:coldspot(--nospam--at)]
> >Sent:  Tuesday, September 09, 1997 10:03 AM
> >To:    seaoc(--nospam--at)
> >Subject:       Re: COMP - Goodbye DOS
> >
> >For those frustrated with operating system integration:
> >
> >There is still far too much engineering software that runs best under DOS.
> >Still
> >some software tools that run best under WIN 3.1.  And then there's WIN 95 in
> >its
> >various flavors.  My work around, that has brought great satisfaction and
> >relatively few problems, is three (3) PCs wired to a single keyboard, mouse,
> >and
> >monitor by way of a electronically switch able box  (OmniView by Belkin).  I
> >keep each application in the environment it was designed for and never have
> >to
> >tweak to cross breed.  And when WIN95 does its crash thing, I give it the
> >rigid
> >middle digit and switch to my old reliable DOS machine.  I never have to (get
> >to?) stop working.  Well worth consideration if you, like I, cling to
> >"legacy"
> >software.  And I'm sorry, but DOS on my 486-25 will always be more responsive
> >than %$*!@ windows in whatever version.  This is true multitasking!
> >
> >Mark Codispoti
> >
> >Ecengrs(--nospam--at) wrote:
> >
> >> Bill Allen wrote:
> >>
> >> << I''ve waited a long time to get DOS small in my rear view
> >> << mirror.
> >>
> >>  <<Regards,
> >>  <<Bill
> >>
> >> I've been using computers for structural analysis since punch card days,
> >>and
> >> I've seen, with a few exceptions, a steady improvement in operating
> >> environments, from Mainframes to VAX to DOS PC's to PC's with Windows95
> >> (Windows 3.1 was, in my opinion, one of the "exceptions").
> >>
> >> I'm with Bill; DOS has served it's purpose. As soon as RISA converts their
> >> stuff to Windows95 (are you reading this Bruce?) I'll be finished with
> >> DOS/Win 3.1 for good.
> >>
> >> Earl Conroy
> >> EC Engineers
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >