--- Nicolas Welte <welte@chemie.uni-konstanz.de> wrote:
> > if there is zero audience. (I'm referring to MS-DOS, not to Windows.)
>
> I think it's most important to most people that there is a version that runs
> on Win9x PCs at all. I don't see much of a point in transferring data to/from
> an 8088 DOS system, because it is sort of a dead end. On the other hand, I
> have a networked 386 IBM PS/2 machine in my lab with MS-DOS only (for data
> aquisition via IEEE488, runs much more stable than any 486/586 system I
> tried). The only 8088 system I have is the A2088 board in my A2000, but it
> doesn't have any I/O ports.
If you have the calls for DOS working, it's no big deal to compile it with
8088 CPU support instead of 386 support. I'm not saying that 8-bit
machines are a likely target (I do still use a Commodore Colt with a 20Mb
drive and an NE1000 ethernet card for driving my PC-based ROM burner), but
it's a compiler flag once you get past the OS wierdness.
At the very least, I can imagine a demand for a DOS solution on a 386 or
better (I happen to have a couple of PS-2/E machines - one with Linux, one
with Win 3.11 - 8Mb RAM, 800Mb drives - they are a tiny 386SX package).
For a lot of things, especially hardware bit-banging, DOS is easier to
deal with than Windows.
-ethan
=====
Visit "The Seventh Continent"
http://penguincentral.com/penguincentral.html
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Archive generated by hypermail 2.1.1.