Re: Derivative effects.
Thus spake Pigeon (jah.pigeon@ukonline.co.uk):
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 07:46:51AM +0100, Jan Minar wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 01:41:30AM -0800, Day Brown wrote:
> > > [...] DR-DOS, since at
> > > least 5, have had taskswitching.
> >
> > Well, sort of. AFAICR, it was a bleeding edge feature, and it felt like
> > one. You just didn't really expect it to work like we expect Linux to
> > work. After all, it was just a DOS. This is not to start a flamewar,
> > but rather to inform the reader the real meaning of the words sometimes
> > isn't the obvious one.
>
> Quarterdeck brought out a task-switching system to run on ordinary DOS; ISTR
> it got a glowing review in Electronics & Wireless World - they rated it
> better than the windoze of the time - but it was text-based rather than full
> pretty pictures GUI, and didn't have M$'s backing, so it sunk without trace.
> Unfortunately I never got a chance to try it.
Yes - Desqview/QEMM wasn't it? I actually wrote an application to run
under DV and had the developer's SDK. It was as I recall pretty good,
although text only as you suggest. Funnily enough I moved house last
month and the DV manuals were among the stuff that didn't make it to
the new one.
Quarterdeck also announced, maybe even released Desqview-X c1994/5 (?)
which IIRC was an implementation of (part of?) the X protocol on
(gulp) DOS. I had a product brief but don't recall ever seeing the
product.
--
|Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept. | Music does not have to be understood|
|Camosun College, Victoria, BC, Canada| It has to be listened to. |
|email: dbarker@camosun.bc.ca | |
|phone: +1 250 370 4452 | Hermann Scherchen. |
Reply to: