Re: Not for me.

[Yaro Kasear <yaro@marupa.net>]

On 03/04/2013 03:26 PM, Joe wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 14:54:50 -0600
> Yaro Kasear <yaro@marupa.net> wrote:
>
>
> > You can still run a very successful desktop system on Linux without
> > installing Xorg server at any point. The only command line that
> > hasn't modernized even a little bit is DOS.
> I hate to be the one to break this to you, but DOS isn't around any
> more.
>
> I have a 2.5cm thick paperback on my bookshelf, 'Windows Command-Line',
> dated 2004 and based on XP/Server 2003. I've no idea how thick the
> current edition is.
>
> Mark is wrong, Windows is also a command-line OS. Originally it was
> indeed based on DOS 5, but hasn't been for more than 15 years. The
> Windows GUI is no more the OS than is X, and anyone who crashes the
> desktop and sees it recover without the daemons turning a hair will
> know this. It's part of the Windows marketing image that 'what you see
> is what it is', but there's no reason to assume that's the truth.
>
> Mind you, Windows 8 still contains Edlin.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edlin
I hate to rebreak it to you, but *MS-DOS* isn't around anymore. I 
believe there are at least two DOS implementations still active. But 
that wasn't my point. My point was even "modern" DOS implementations are 
woefully obsolete and outdated due to the central designs of DOS are 
archaic and were built around the idea PCs weren't going to get very 
powerful. As far as OS design goes, they made the design error of not 
making the OS that adaptible or "future-proof."

When (U)EFI completely replaces BIOS THEN DOS will be completely dead. 
Right now it's just a horribly obsolete OS used by people afraid of 
kernels or enterprises that refuse to upgrade some of their infrastructure.

Regards