🚀 go-pugleaf

fit...@osu.edu wrote:

>In <40uqt8$6...@mirv.unsw.edu.au>, Vincent Ho <s2172730> writes:
>>In article <3vk3o1$c...@eng_ser1.erg.cuhk.hk> kyw...@cs.cuhk.hk (Wong) writes:
>>>In message <3vdumb$k...@seymour.sfu.ca> - b...@sfu.ca (Jeremy Bee) writes:
>>>
>>>:>Also, if you simply type "ver" at the prompt in Win95, you won't get
>> "Dos-7.0" but "Win95".  
>>>:>
>>>:>Jeremy
>>>
>>>	If you run MSD at "SAM mode" of windows 95, you'll get "MS-DOS 7.0".
>>
>>
>>  Exactly, but all this means nothing.  I could rewrite the "ver" function in
>>DOS or in Windows 95 to say anything I wanted.  All that it demonstrates is
>>that someone has changed the code for the ver function.  It doesn't prove
>>anything *else* have changed.  I'm not bashing/praising Windows 95, just saying
>>that "ver" is almost certainly independent of the rest of the OS.
>>
>>________________________________________________________
>>			Loki				
>>
>>--> OS Too: We've given up on waking him.
>>
>>E-mail: s217...@cse.unsw.edu.au				
>>Web   : http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~s2172730/
>>
>>--------> May the force live long & prosper.  <---------
>Win95 is a new desktop shell with 32bit support.  Anything that is made for it will
>also work with Windows 3.1 with a 32bit patch that is available from almost all
Not True - There are already many BETA apps for Win95 that will not
run on 3.1 even with Win32s running.  Example - Netscape 1.2B4
>ftp servers that support the windows enviroment.  The dos support is truley less support
>then dos 6.x offers.  I cannot get many of my games to run under the 95 enviroment
>even when I bypass the desktop shell and go through the long task of getting directly 
>to the command prompt.  All Microsoft did was add 32bit support, some extra utilities
>that windows 3.1 didn't ship with, and made the desktop a pain to navigate.
>For a true OS you should consider OS/2 Warp!  This platform will run many dos and windows
>programs and native os2 programs.  It will also let you customise Dos and Windows settings
It will not run Office 95 or any other new Win95 products and will
only run Windows programs if you have Windows installed.
>to meet individual programs needs.  For example, On my system I have successfully ran:
>	Doom/2
>	Gunship 2000
>	2 seperate windows sessions (WP 6.1 in one) and (Excel in the other)
>	and 10 OS/2 specific applications (including Harddisk utils, and Internet programs)
>	at the same time.
I can do the same thing in 95
>I have failed to see anyone match this with win95.  Also OS/2 has a command structure that
>will allow you to boot up Specific Dos Sessions (like 4.1, 5.0, 6.X, 7.0) if a program requires
>a specific dos.  And in the event that this tatic doesn't work.  OS/2 has the option to boot
>up the system with your older DOS still 100% operational.
>I fail to see the greatness of 95 when Warp goes far beyond.  But I guess for people who don't
>take computing seriously 95 is as good as a MAC.  ---Pun intended---

>If you would like to know more about OS/2 a true OS, and not just flame me, Please feel free to 
>email me.


>	 

==================================================================
Dennis Harrigan                       Visit "My Corner of the WEB"

New Jersey - More than just a suburb of NYC
             Its also a suburb of Philadelphia
                             
den...@omni.voicenet.com
dhar...@camden.mmc.com
dennis.j...@den.mmc.com
http://www.voicenet.com/~dennisj/
==================================================================