--- Nicolas Welte <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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.