• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

DOS is for lazy people

MikeS said:
I think that any of the "my OS is better than yours" discussions are a boring waste of time, but particularly one comparing DOS to Windows (since Windows has always included DOS or a much more powerful CLI). In the 'real world' people are using applications, and (hopefully) never have to deal with the finer points of the OS. For low-level stuff that involves fooling with ports or disk drives directly, DOS is often more convenient, but for pretty well everything else a GUI is probably more efficient (not to mention that most apps require one these days). Seems to me that OJ's DOS example could be done just as easily with a batch file in Windows, clicking on a labelled icon to start the process instead of having to remember (and possibly misspell) the magic key or keys instead.

I think the key is "once properly configured"; if a Windows system's tasks are properly configured then you can be even lazier than in DOS; I usually read my email while relaxing on the couch, cordless mouse in hand, occasionally switching into itunes' library to select some different music, switching to Chrome to check into various forums, etc., never needing to pick up the cordless keyboard except to occasionally enter a search term into Google.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that in general we're very much on the same page regarding practical computer use. However, my example can be done with closed eyes and, assuming good ability to wiggle fingers, does not involve potentially painful physical actions. Although definitely not a Windows user, I am well aware of it's functionality and certainly won't argue with you on that count. Personal preferences are important and if Windows will do what you want, that's just great. I did have two basic things in mind with my DOS example though. One is the promotion of DOS as a system that can in fact be set up to do some sophisticated things in an easy manner. Perhaps inspire someone to do that instead of doing a MS style install and leaving it at that. The other, I've talked about in the previous post, and that is the difficulties in using a mouse. My opinion is that it can be a waste of resources for even very functional people, and a downright pain for others.

Bottom line: I've seen very few systems that are truly efficiently configured but when they are, in the DOS vs. Windows comparison I think Windows comes out ahead as the most versatile in most situations; still, it really depends on what you want to do.
Click to expand...

I agree that for general computing Windows is way ahead of DOS, as is any modern OS. I think that a few things are better in DOS, and more things are possible than many believe. Assuming my personal choice of command line only, then I do think DOS wins on ease of use. I am reasonably comfortable on a BSD system now. As you know it has a very powerful command line, but I have not been able to muster the same luxurious functionality that I have with the wealth of TSRs and utilities that were developed for DOS during it's early days. Part of this is because DOS is really made for amateurs, whereas BSD generally assumes that you have all day, and the brains, to read and remember lots of stuff.
 
Ole Juul said:
I'm sure that in general we're very much on the same page regarding practical computer use. However, my example can be done with closed eyes and, assuming good ability to wiggle fingers, does not involve potentially painful physical actions. Although definitely not a Windows user, I am well aware of it's functionality and certainly won't argue with you on that count. Personal preferences are important and if Windows will do what you want, that's just great. I did have two basic things in mind with my DOS example though. One is the promotion of DOS as a system that can in fact be set up to do some sophisticated things in an easy manner. Perhaps inspire someone to do that instead of doing a MS style install and leaving it at that. The other, I've talked about in the previous post, and that is the difficulties in using a mouse. My opinion is that it can be a waste of resources for even very functional people, and a downright pain for others.
Click to expand...
As you say, we're pretty well on the same page but I still think that if you spend the same time and attention on custom configuring the system then you can run pretty well everything exactly the same way or even better/simpler on a Windows box as on your DOS machine, with the added benefits of multi-processing, speech or remote keyboard control and the various other accessibility options, a much wider range of apps (especially multi-media), etc. etc.

If you take the time to learn the various keyboard commands as you had to do to use Q(edit?) then you could probably get by completely without a mouse; shortcut keys to start the apps, macro processor if necessary, and Bob's your uncle. I often use the calculator: CTL-ALT-C brings it up, and every function uses a more-or-less intuitive key; If I need a 'tape' or more complex calculations, CTL-ALT-E brings up Excel and again, almost everything has a key defined for it, not really any different from using 1-2-3 in DOS unless you really want to use the mouse.

Almost all my folders (except for pictures with thumbnails) show in detail view so I can easily scroll and pick with the keyboard, and I almost never use the START button.

As to wasting resources, that's not really a consideration any longer these days of finding 2Gig P4s at the curb on collection day, although DOS apps do fly on that P4...

The comment from some people that they prefer to use slower and more primitive software on an old computer because of distractions on a newer one is interesting to ponder; probably the same idea as some well-known writers preferring manual typewriters to word processors or even electric typewriters...

I'm just sayin', just like DOS (and much more so), there's a lot in Windows that's practically never really exploited, but it also takes time to set it up. And even when I'm working in DOS I find myself more and more often wishing I had one of the many command options and extensions that have been added to the Windows DOS equivalents over the years...

And finally, although I understand that a lot of people enjoy the challenge, experience and bragging rights, I never did quite see the point of spending a lot of time and effort to make a computer from the 80's do things (badly) in the 2010's that it never did then; other than games, how many people here have ever run Lotus 1-2-3, dBase or Wordstar on their 5150?

But I suppose putting a multi-GB flash drive, accelerator and Ethernet adapter into that PC and cruisin' the web is equivalent to dropping that Chrysler hemi into your Model A and cruisin' downtown to the A&W, while other folks painstakingly keep that Model A in original condition and drive it on Sundays down country lanes just like back then...
 
Last edited:
Ole Juul said:
I agree that for general computing Windows is way ahead of DOS, as is any modern OS. I think that a few things are better in DOS, and more things are possible than many believe. Assuming my personal choice of command line only, then I do think DOS wins on ease of use. I am reasonably comfortable on a BSD system now. As you know it has a very powerful command line, but I have not been able to muster the same luxurious functionality that I have with the wealth of TSRs and utilities that were developed for DOS during it's early days. Part of this is because DOS is really made for amateurs, whereas BSD generally assumes that you have all day, and the brains, to read and remember lots of stuff.
Click to expand...
It's been mentioned some people think the same of Dos and for that matter anyone unfamiliar with any OS. Out of interest how long did it take for you to be comfortable with Dos?

Great discussion BTW.
 
Last edited:
Caluser2000 said:
Some people think the same of Dos and for that matter any unfamiliar OS. Out of interest how long did it take for you to be comfortable with Dos?
Click to expand...

You probably know the answer to that. :) A very long time! But, for argument's sake lets say the first 10 years were the real learning curve - but that included getting a grip on general computing and hardware. The years after that were really just coasting. I've also spent about 10 years with Linux (recently BSD) after that. Keep in mind that I'm a really a slow learner. Sometimes it may not look like that, but that is because I act as if I should reach a bar which is way above what is realistic for me. My skill is in getting perspective, but in actual computing I do tend to aspire to more than what I have brains for. :)

Please understand that I am well aware that most operating systems can be used to good advantage by people who learn how. I've read about Windows sysadmins who were quite able to keep a secure Vista system, regardless of many other people's trolling to the contrary.

Now about how easy it is to configure a system for easy use. Just for argument's sake. Take a look at the MS-DOS help file. Introduced as a command with 6.0 I think. That simple file contains just about everything you need to know to be really competent. Of course there's more, but can you point to a similar sized work that would get you very far with Linux or other OS? This truly is aimed at amateurs. I would venture to say that at the beginning, DOS was almost just a dumbed down UNIX clone. Actually at this point it looks even more like that to me.

One of the things that makes a big difference in my perspective, is that in DOS I can set up a logical system of directories and then work with that. Linux has a file system, but the big difference is that I am not the one that made it up. I have a difficult time remembering anything that someone else makes up. When you do something yourself, then it is easy to remember. The same with commands. I've got a terrible memory, but I have a system of naming for files and .bat commands that has evolved and I don't have to think. I'm sure most of us have experienced this with passwords. Use a system (your own) and you can remember quite long ones, whereas you would easily forget a random password given to you from someone else. I see MS-Windows users with much more than 10 years experience, and they don't know where their files are - is that their fault? One could argue that it isn't. :)

Anyway, my main point is that I can chose key strokes that are are easy for someone disabled who takes a dislike to mice because they require me to use mental resources that I would prefer to save for other tasks. That would be me. :) No big reaches, or waving my arms about and straining myself. I am also hinting that doing so could free up mental resources for some other more physically capable users. At this point my eyes get deadly tired following that stupid cursor around and I resent that very much. My line earlier about seeing an Olympic competitor with a walkman is the key. Why spend extra energy?

I think it is worth spending some time with an OS to learn about it because that pays off. DOS has stayed the same for a long time so I can do that. Linux keeps changing so I'll probably never learn it very well. BSD, perhaps a little better in that regard (I've got hopes). MS-Windows - no idea. :) Mac OS? It doesn't sound like many people configure that, so perhaps it isn't suitable - but then it probably has great consistency over time.

If I am making any claims for DOS beyond my own preference, it is that it is specifically aimed at beginners and real control can probably be gained in shorter time than other OSs. Comparing OSs on that level is not usually done and I am enjoying other people's input on that so far.
 
MikeS said:
As to wasting resources, that's not really a consideration any longer these days of finding 2Gig P4s at the curb on collection day, although DOS apps do fly on that P4...
Click to expand...

I meant physiological resources. Don't you find it tedious to have to look at, and follow, the mouse cursor? I certainly do. If that resource was minimized I'd do better at other tasks. My eyes get sore just looking at the screen for hours and I like to just type and think without having that precious visual resource wasted on an OS.

Yep, it's pretty cool how old software flies on what is free computers these days. Actually, I find it quite refreshing and easier on the nerves when there are no delays. ;)
 
Some like four-on-floor and stomping on clutch while other simply opt for shoving the stick into "D" - both pretty much get you where you want to go. Makes a case for dual booting.
 
Ole Juul said:
The comfortable, and perhaps inspiring, environment is an interesting aspect. A friend of William Gibson (author of Neuromancer) told me that Bill liked to write on a typewriter and then transcribe to his computer for editing later. That was at the end of the 80's and he may have changed his method since, but process is indeed an important part of creativity - and typewriters are notoriously linear and non-multitasking.
Click to expand...

Different era, pre-computers, but Louis L'Amour did the same. He had an old manual typewriter that went with him on all of his adventures. He would often carry it with him (I can only imagine how much of a pain that would be), and when the inspiration struck, he'd find a quiet corner, sit down on the floor, prop his knees up, set his typewriter on his knees, and type. Sometimes an entire story in one sitting.

Ole Juul said:
I am also on about the physical movement. A mouse is quite strenuous to operate. Especially those huge Microsoft type that even someone like me that can handle a low D bamboo flute can't handle without putting my whole hand on it which then requires whole arm movement, and therefore also neck muscles are being involved......When you consider a writing task (like now) then the idea of moving the arm off the keyboard and back again is also ludicrous - and for people like me, downright painful on some days.
Click to expand...

I'm not disabled, nor do I (usually) find that my eyes get tired following a cursor or working with computer screens (though with another 35 years or so, I'm sure that will change). I've always hated - vehemently - that I have to move my hand off the keyboard to control the mouse. In the early-mid 1990's when keyboards and laptops began coming with the "red dot" pointer between the G and H keys, I LOVED IT! I never had to move my hand off the keyboard, and (usually) the mouse buttons were just below the space bar, using my left thumb to hit the left mouse key, right thumb for the right mouse key. Was it great for gaming or extremely precise control such as what would be required in say, Photoshop? No... but if I wanted to participate in those activities, I knew that I would just pull out my high-resolution mouse and suck it up. For general computing with Windows, to me, you can't get better than that little "red dot."
 
Chuck(G) said:
How many things can you do at once that require mental concentration?
Click to expand...

It's defined in the human hardware book that homo sapiens have one single conciousness. Anything above that would be classified as demonic posession or mental illness. Of course humans can multitask, doing "concious" stuff (ones that demand concentration) and "unconcious" stuff (routine task not demanding concentration) at the same time. So that's our dual-core cpu. But dealing with two tasks demanding concentration at the same time would be extremely difficult (in the view of a hypothetical designer of the brain). I guess it would uninevitably lead to split personalities and ultimately to a conflict of interests with one self. Besides, the standard human hardware just isn't up to it - try to focus your two eyes independently on two objects at once ;).

There are non-standard implementations that showcase the issues that may arise on a multitasking-enabled human operating system - siamese twins come to mind...
 
michal said:
It's defined in the human hardware book that homo sapiens have one single conciousness. Anything above that would be classified as demonic posession or mental illness. Of course humans can multitask, doing "concious" stuff (ones that demand concentration) and "unconcious" stuff (routine task not demanding concentration) at the same time. So that's our dual-core cpu. But dealing with two tasks demanding concentration at the same time would be extremely difficult (in the view of a hypothetical designer of the brain). I guess it would uninevitably lead to split personalities and ultimately to a conflict of interests with one self. Besides, the standard human hardware just isn't up to it - try to focus your two eyes independently on two objects at once ;).

There are non-standard implementations that showcase the issues that may arise on a multitasking-enabled human operating system - siamese twins come to mind...
Click to expand...

Are you telling use that you can't smoke a cigarette a sip a cup of coffee at the same time?
 
I'm not telling you that. No need. Just try for yourself. Put the cigarette in one hand, a cup of coffee in the other, put them close to your mouth in the same moment, and... or, well, it'll be better if you DON'T TRY IT. Just try to imagine that, ok ? ;)
 
So it's impossible to walk pushing a lawn mover whilst scanning for dog poo, listening out for when the mowing runs out of gas whilst noting the the mowers' catcher is fulling up with grass due to the amount of extra effort it takes to push it then?

Good. I like the couch better anyway.
 
Caluser2000 said:
So it's impossible to walk pushing a lawn mover whilst scanning for dog poo, listening out for when the mowing runs out of gas whilst noting the the mowers' catcher is fulling up with grass due to the amount of extra effort it takes to push it then?

Good. I like the couch better anyway.
Click to expand...

Lol! I can imagine pushing the damn thing for half an hour before realizing that it's out of gas. You're right, the couch sounds better. ;)
 
Caluser2000 said:
> to walk pushing a lawn mover
> whilst scanning for dog poo,
> listening out for when the mowing runs out of gas
> whilst noting the the mowers' catcher is fulling up with grass
Click to expand...

Wow, that's four tasks at any one time - you're too demanding of yourself :) but anyway, note that your lawn mowing app isn't multi threaded. It's event driven (that would be interrupt-driven in DOS). You set up handlers for events 2,3,4 and interrupt the main process (1) when an event occurs.

Ole Juul said:
Lol! I can imagine pushing the damn thing for half an hour before realizing that it's out of gas.
Click to expand...

My internet connection goes into suspend mode after 15 seconds inactivity, and sometimes just doesn't want to wake up. This always comes out when someone tries to write up an enlightening comment or whatever for half an hour, only to realize after pressing "send" that there's no connection (a "doh" or something is also likely to be heard)
 
I feel that my tiller is going to fall apart and sling shards of hot metal at me whenever I till the garden. 1. It's over 50 years old. 2. The carburetor is being held onto it by fishing line. 3. The thing barely has any screws holding the firing chamber together. 4. I have to wear a gas mask when I use it. (Too many blown gaskets.) :) I use that tiller just for fun, I've got a brand new one that's used for the actual intended purpose.

But to an extent, DOS isn't for lazy people. It wasn't blessed with Plug-and-Play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top