[...] >> Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that >> supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. > > You could also (allegedly) just change your Win3x or Win9x "shell=" > line (system.ini ??) to command.com and use BootGUI=0 (or whatever). > Or such. ;-)
But that would require using Windows. I try not to use proprietary systems where possible. >> I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. > > Of course! I mean, there are advantages to not multitasking (believe > it or not) *sometimes*, but most people, myself included, would enjoy > being able to compile in the background (or download a file, etc). In DOS, it would be awesome to have true multitasking, where you can let a process run in the background (like a compile) while you do something else (browser?) But to be honest, all I really want/need is some sort of extension or "shell" that provides task-switching, rather than true multitasking. -jh ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/ _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
