> FreeDOS is much more stable then MS-DOS due ot: > 1) Eric Auer did a nice job flushing files to disk which lowered considerably > power failure problems > 2) It is much better then MS-DOS for compatibility with modern machines, > specialy > big disks and memory > > So I vote for implementing whatever is needed in FreeDOS's kernel. This way it > will be more compatible with big disks too
I don't find that to be the case at all, but just like virtualizers and CMSs and BIOSs, they are not all created equally. I find MS-DOS (particularly versions 7+) more stable and compatible with things, though FreeDOS may have an advantage in certain situations. The one thing MS-DOS does that FreeDOS still doesn't do (and I don't know that anyone is working on it) is supporting sector sizes other than 512 bytes. This is very important to me in the development of my USB drivers since I am able to better support CD, DVD, and BD in their native 2k sector sizes. I'm still experimenting with that to see how useful it is since I don't know if it really makes sense to format optical media (other than DVD-RAM) with standard FAT-type file systems. But, I am currently able to read and write directly to USB-attached DVD-RAM disks (which have a 2k sector size) that are formatted in FAT32. That is, I mount the disk directly as a FAT32 hard drive (with 2k sectors) in MS-DOS and it doesn't realize it's actually a DVD-RAM. DVD-RAM has very much gone out of popularity but I hope to be able to do something similar with "regular" optical media. I also have seen some USB devices that have sector sizes larger than 512 bytes. _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
