Re: c/c++: a new adventure

[Wing Wong <buyer1342@saladlove.com>]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Ben Kohlen wrote:

> >Dos is a good system, but i still prefer linux
> Ok, I was gonna mention this before when someone used the phrase 
> "dos/linux"... why is it that people are comparing _DOS_ to linux?  In terms 
> of operating system features and advancement, linux is more comparable to 
> Windows NT than dos.  Linux just happens to be better than NT in 90% of 
> every way possible.

Most people who compare DOS to Linux tend to be from the groups who see
the command line interface side of Linux in their minds when they hear
Linux. (Most Linux distros have GUI interface and management tools which
can be used instead of the command line commands for those who would
prefer such things. I use whatever is available. :)

Another point to make is that Linux is best to be compared to Unix-type
OS's. Better to compre Oranges with Oranges and Apples with Apples. NT is
an OS which evolved from Windows, which in turn was built on top of DOS in
response to Apple's Lisa/Mac systems.

There are, essentially, Apple/MacOS, Unix/VM/Linux, and Windows/Dos/OS2.
There are also others.. like BeOS and Amiga, but they aren't exactly high
on the head count these days. ^_^; (I could be wrong.)

Each should really be compared in their own groupings. But all of them ARE
OS's. 

> DOS, it can be argued, does not even fit the definition of an operating 
> system.

An Operating System is just the software which makes things work. Alot of
RT type OS's don't have threading or multi-procesing and are very limited
in memory management. DOS stands for Disk Operating System. It was an
operating system who's job it was to manage the disk activity and programs
related to it.

The bios would be the program loader/boot strapper. :)

> No threading.  No multi-processing. _very_ limited memory management.  
> At best, DOS is an advanced program loader, so please don't compare it
> to Linux/UNIX/BSD, just because they are both historically
> command-line oriented. Cheers, Ben.

Heh heh.. and don't compare Linux to NT just because they run on computers
and have Gui's. ;) I'm of the mind to think that NT really can't be
compared to a Unix-type OS in terms of performance, reliability,
scalability, extendibility, etc. (Market share does not equal quality.)

> PS: If I sounded a little irritated, I apologize, I didn't mean to be hard 
> on anyone.

^_- I'd personally not worry about it. ;)

Been trying to  think up game storyline concepts, but coming up dry. IT
actually might be good to go back to basics of simple OS's and simple game
interfaces to help one see more clearly before tackling on more complex
games. Since a complex looking interface may in fact be just a clever use
of a simpler, more primitive interface. ^_^;

Anyways, back to my attempts to unblock my mental block. ^^;

Wing.

=================================================================
The GameProgrammer.Com mailing list is for the open discussion
of any topic related to the art, science, and business of
programming games. This list is especially tolerant of beginners.
We were all beginners once

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE please visit:
http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html