From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: usotsuki@buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 11:13:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] MS-DOS In-Reply-To: References: <0f57f9d8248db61cba34372814d2f45e.squirrel@webmail.yaccman.com> <2c674075-db86-827b-fd97-30921757e9ae@aueb.gr> <7C35A731-84A0-4B9F-AEE6-8D9D1A06B315@cheswick.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Clem Cole wrote: > ​Networking not so much. You definitely could (and people did/do) add > networking to executives. In those days, DEC has DECnet for their systems > (including MS-DOS) and today in the IoT world, I use many of my Arduino's > with network connections. But I the programing is very much like it was in > my DOS-8/DOS-11/RT-11 days. I've seen TSR network stacks for MS-DOS; I don't *use* such, but they exist. > ​We ran V7 on 8" floppies (SA800's from Shugart Associates IIRC). These > were ~ 256K each. You did have to swap disks in/out a little as Marc > described. You booted from one Floppy and replaced it with a "root" FS > floppy after the OS loaded. But it all could and did fit. You had ad > editor, the compilers, etc. I think that's how Minix worked on 5.25" floppies too, if I remember how I got it up on my old Tandy 1000EX. > So it all come back to my basic point. The PC and MS-DOS >>could<< have > been made to be in the image of UNIX easily; if people had cared or it was > needed/desired. But economics caused it to stay in "all its crapiness" > not technology. I think OS/2 was certainly closer to Unix than MS-DOS was. -uso.