#3DS & Windows 4.0??
42 messages in this thread
Should we all be planning ahead?
Want to read a good article on the future of the PC operating system? Pick up
the PC Computing March 1994 issue with the look ahead at Windows 4.0.
In it they review a sneak peak that Microsoft has been showing. It seems as
though (and stated in as many words in the article) that with the release of
Win 4.0 either late this year or early 1995 DOS will finally be dead. Windows
will in fact be the operating system, no longer sitting on top of DOS.
It mentions a lot of great advances, particularly a plug 'n play capability for
adding new hardware. But it mentions that the death of DOS could be seen in
1993 since there really was no significant DOS apps that had a major upgrade in
1993. (guess they didn't check out 3DS3)
The big question is this. With DOS heading out the "window", how should users
of 3DS prepare for the future. Will 3DS run under Windows 4.0? Will there in
fact be a DOS 7 we will need to support some DOS programs? If 3DS runs in Win
4.0 will it appear as a Windows interface program or still like a DOS?
Any ideas or infor out there?
Very curious…..
Paul
You should read the Byte article on Windows 4 (Chicago). It states that
Windows 4 will still make use of DOS, particularly to run device drivers and
tsr's that are not windows 4 bootable.
As much as I hate DOS I don't think it'll die that easily, and I think
Microsoft is castrating Windows 4 too much by making it so backward compatible
(the list is long and depressing, basically catering to the lowest/largest
common denominator in computing), and given the choice I'll spend a little more
and get NT in a heartbeat!
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John, I know you're not a big fan of DOS but I've definitely come to the
conclusion that Windows is worse. I want to see a UNIX style system whereby you
can access the command line directly from within Windows. Then I'll be happy.
There are alot of things about DOS which are great, but people new to computing
just don't get into. File management is definitely alot easier in DOS than
Windows. And I've discovered a new utility thanks to Dan O'leary and Gus that
makes DOS way cool its called 4DOS. If you don't like DOS but use it ckeck out
4DOS. In the meantime I'm going to scream for a DOS window which opens you up
to the command line in a window. Then I could do everything I want and still
live with Kludgy Windows. <g>
-JE
John, I used to have the exact same attitude as you about Windoze. There are
still a whole lot of things I don't like about it, but I find it much more
productive than DOS, easier to manage files (I can run file manager without
having to exit applications all the damned time) and there IS a dos window. It
should have been set up with the default configuration of Windoze. You can do
just about anything you want from the dos window, except run protected mode
apps.
My attitude against dos does not lie in its complexity, or non-intuitive text
based approach which requires you learn it like a foreign language (I've
already done that, for the most part), but in its freaking backwardsness. This
operating system is simply not up to the task of running today's software on
today's computers, and if we're going to move to a new level, I vote for a
graphical environment. As great as Unix is, most unix folks have some sort of
X windows deal running for many of their tasks.
As it stands now, I'd like to be able to use a 32bit true multitasking
operating system, and I am beginning to really appreciate the visually based
environment of any windows app (X Windows, Irix, Windoze, System 7) over the
text based Dos. Realizing that Unix will not happen on a widespread basis on
PC's I vote for NT.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John,
I know there's a DOS window but its not really a window! And its a joke! What
I'm talking about is a window you can click on that has a C:\ prompt that you
can type in etc. not one that shells out. And the tree structure of Windows is
totally frustrating. While 3.1 is the first fairly stable version of Windows.
As far as multi-tasking goes multi platform networked systems work much better
as far as I'm concerned. I suppose you'd like to be able to have photo-styler
and Fractal painter ole'd simultaneously. Yuck! Windows file manager is gross,
but I won't belabor it. The more I work with Windows the less I like it. On the
other hand DOS keeps getting better and better. I also find Windows a cluttered
environment. I think I'm going to need a 35" monitor to do true multi-tasking.
<g>
-JE
There's no doubt that 3.1 leaves a lot to be desired, and 4.0 probably will,
too. But I've played a tiny bit with NT and liked what I saw. I do prefer a
windows environment to the DOS one, and I really detest DOS big time. While it
has some powerful features it is so sorely lacking in fundamental design and
implementation (in my layman's opinion) that it makes me sick to my stomach.
Just because there are a bunch of folks out there with 286's and 386 SX's Mr.
Gates wont build a 32bit operating system. The PC platform has the most
abysmal operating system I've used.
I agree about the current DOS window, but it beats nothing. I would like to
see windows implemented along the lines of x windows and irix, where you can
open multiple window sessions and just jump between them with the curser.
One definitely needs a large monitor with Windoze, but a good graphics card can
make a huge difference, too. I hated windows altogether untill I got the MGA,
now I actually like it sort of. 1024×768 makes a pleasant working environment.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John,
I suppose Windows N/T does offer the the best potential but many people seem to
like OS/2. Not that Mr Gates is listening but why not come out with a DOS which
totally bypasses the 640 barrier and just offer it as an alternative. I can't
imagine how people are going to continue using 286 based systems anyway. While
multi-tasking is a nice feature, I find that having multiple apps really bogs
the power of the PC down. And while Pentium based systems will help correct
this situation with enough RAM, I don't find the advantage compelling. There's
only so much I can do at one time anyway. I was working with a one monitor
solution and a switcher to go back and forth. I have now found that two SVGA
monitors work best for me, so that while test rendering for instance I can be
working on other things. I'll admit that I'm resistant to change unless I see a
significant benefit. One thing I've realised since acquiring the PAR for
instance is that regardless of what operating system I need to implement, I no
longer need to worry about device drivers as with the Targa. The point here
being that in the past I would have been more concerned about compatibility. If
Windows NT made things easier in terms of memory allocation and device drivers
etc. I would see a compeling reason to switch. But it seems to me that while
the interface is easier in that its iconographic the worst part of DOS is still
a problem. And its not the concept of DOS but the way its had to develop over
the years that's the problem. The concept of DOS is a good one, its
implementation because of the 640k barrier and how devices are loaded is the
real crux of the problem. DOS could be designed to do multi-tasking. Several
years ago there was a program called Double DOS which did just. But that was
before people where using more than 640k of memory. I'm hoping that some clever
people like the people who wrote 4DOS will realise that a multi-tasking DOS
based environment would appeal to alot of people, which could be really simple
without the inherent massive overhead of NT. Nobody's listening but I just
wanted to point out that the concept of DOS is not bad, per se anymore than the
concept of Windows is bad; the problem for both is the downward compatibility
as you pointed out, and the poor implementation to circum-navigate that blasted
barrier. Its ironic that that even now there is no one standard for allocating
high memory for applications which is just going to continue to compound the
problem. I'm speaking of approaches like EMS and XMS and VCPI and DPMI and who
knows what else. Maybe NT will resolve this longrun.
Anyway thanks for the thoughts, I do appreciate your viewpoint, and just wanted
to put the issue in clearer perspective.
-JE
The file manager that comes w/ PC Tools for Windows 2.0 has an option to open a
command line at the bottom of the window! I have found this feature alone to
be worth the price of admission. (I als like the multidesk feature which helps
eliminate some of the clutter…)
–Nat'n
Nathan,
I've always bought the DOS version of PC Tools but on my next upgrade, I'll try
the Windows version. Thanks for the Tip.
-JE
Actuall you probably won't have much choice. I believe Central Point dumped
their entire DOS line of programs.
>> I believe Central Point dumped their entire DOS line of programs. <<
Well I've got Version 8 and its DOS based. I haven't heard of a version 9.
Version 9 is out for a couple of months. DOS isn't _that_ dead yet…
Gus thanks! Ironically I just got my upgrade offer today. <g> If
Microsoft is smart they'll just merge it in… like Unix. With
regard to PC Tools, I think this time I'd consider going the Windows
route, might even make it bearable. <g> I assume you've worked with
both, what would you suggest?
Well Tim, I guess you're wrong! I just recieved an upgrade offer for
PC Tools Pro 9.0 for DOS and PC Tools 2.0 for Windows.
I guess so. Well, I guess DOS still has a few last gasps left 🙂
Tim,
>> I guess DOS still has a few last gasps left… <<
So brutal a statement! Actually all the high end animation packages
are still DOS based. As well as the better accounting packages. I
don't know what the connection is. <g>
>> I think I'm going to need a 35" monitor to do true multi-tasking.
It never ends. Even at workstation resolutions (1100×960 or so) with tiny fonts
I am forever running out of screen. Gimme a video wall.
dan
>> I am forever running out of screen. Gimme a video wall. <<
Did you ever see "The man who fell to earth"? <g> Being an
ex-Broadcast On-Air TD, I can definitely relate!
Both of you are in for a good surprise with NT. It offers all of the stuff you
are talking about. It is way faster and more robust than any Windows, it has a
dummy DOS box that kinda work but it can also have a great, fully implemented,
Unix command shell. In fact, there are a couple of Unix shells available. It
still lacks just about every thing I need for my day to day work (its DOS
support is below average and the bad Windows program run just as bad under NT)
but I sure hope they do something about it. I don't mind the idea of Windows.
It is nice to have the great graphics interface for most of the stuff we do
(graphics, audio, and so forth), and still be able to access one or more dos
boxes for things that weren't meant to be done in an Icon world. My only, and
BIG problem with it is that it simply doesn't work. It's not really Windows
fault. The system itself is sort of ok. Granted it is a big hack and far from
something designed from the ground up, the real problem is the stinking quality
of programming I see. I don't remember of being able to use Windows for more
that 30 minutes straight without having something going havoc. Every stupid
program I install in Windows is a nightmare. They all think they are the only
program you have. Every one of them go into my SYSTEM.INI, WIN.INI,
AUTOEXEC.BAT, CONFIG.SYS and change it in any way they see fit regardless of
how screwy. What's the point of a system that allows multiple windows if you
can't install more than one without having it stepping all over the next guy?
Windows programs SUCK!!!! Windows programmers SUCK!!! They all should go back
to that special schooling system they came from and spend another 50 years of
basic system analysis…
Gee, you both had to get me started didn't you… <g>
Uh, gee Gus, I think it's time you mellowed out on the coffee for the day. 🙂
I'm with you, Gus, but from a non-programmer's perspective. I really like the
idea approach of Windows and that very complex software can be learned very
quickly. This is possible because most all the apps use common interfaces to
the hardware. What I don't like is that none of my windows apps operate
without leaving me hanging. I have gotten to know the "save" quick key very
well because I constantly get GPF's. With ver 3.0 it was UAE's. Bill Gates
was very proud to announce that with 3.1 the dreaded UAE was gone forever!.
What he meant to say was that they just changed the name of it to "GPF". Many
of the causes of GPF's are well known and no attempt seems to be made to
correct them. Pagemaker 5.0 has had a very well known bug for over a year now
with the HP III printer and their answer is it's time to upgrade to the HP IV.
I like the idea behind Windows but I think MS really does need to get better
programmers. Maybe they need to develop a specification with definite
boundaries and if a developer writes code outside those boundaries the software
just won't install period! Right now the apps will install but just be buggy.
The blaim I get from MS is that third party developers don't follow the Windows
specs many times.
I'm scared of new operating systems. So scared that I will wait for quite some
time before making a switch. I make a living with my computers now and I can't
afford to have a month or two of missed due dates because of sloppy operating
systems and surprises. I still use DOS 5.0 here and it works fine. To date
I've found no arguement to switch to 6.0, 6.1, or 6.2. Why so many versions ?
Simple! They're all buggy! When I had DOS 4.01 things worked pretty well and
then a dealer here in town convinced me to switch to DR DOS and even though it
worked everything I did ran 30-50% slower. After, a month of tinkering I
finally removed it and went back to DOS 4.01. Later I was forced to switch to
DOS 5.0 and it did run at the same speed as DOS 4.01 and I was again compatible
with the world out there. I'm not resistant to change as John Ellis said he is
but I understand his reluctance to jump everytime MS or Novell or IBM says time
to get a new operating system. I've been telling everyone I'll probably switch
to either OS2 ver 3.1 or DOS7.1/Windows ver 4.1 <G> For the time being I'll
stick to DOS 5.0 and Windows 3.1. I am using WFW but it is so buggy I think I
might go back to regular Win 3.1 and upgrade my Lantastic 5.0 to a Lantastic
windows ver. I have had no bug problems yet with Lantastic 5.0 AI but it was a
bear to install and set up right.
Don,
The reason for some many DOS versions is mostly legal. With 6.0 we got
doublespace, but some things didin't quite work right, thus 6.1 with buffer
flushes for compressed drives, with 6.2 you no longer have double space thanks
to the legal win by Stacker. Seems MSoft kind of stole the LZS routines when
they put them in 6.0, but as 6.1 proves, they didn't steal enough….
I'm waiting for Chicago (Win4.0)
Tom
I think that DOS 6.1 is from IBM. MS jumped from 6.0 to 6.2. Or Am I WRONG? 🙂
ana /krazy images
You may be right about those version numbers… who can keep up? Word went from
2.0 to 6.0!! Just think of all the money I saved on interim upgrades….
Tom
DOS 6.0 is from Microsoft
DOS 6.1 is PC-DOS from IBM
DOS 6.2 is the upgrade to Microsoft's 6.0
DOS 7.0 is DR-DOS from Novell
The similar/different version numbers on the various DOS's are a bit
of marketing one-up-manship.
And 6.21 is Microsoft's post-trial version without Doublespace!
Dave
When I played with NT it gave me the impression that Microsoft (for once) was,
for once, not catering to the lowest common denominator (I hate that, in case
you didn't know <g>). I'm very excited about NT, and wish desperately that I
could install it now… on the other hand, untill those sucky windows
programmers start properly writing and porting apps to NT it doesn't seem like
there's a whole lot of reasons to make the switch at this time. Also, how
would one run 3DS? Is it possible to run a pure DOS session with NT installed,
that would allow 3DS to run?
If I'm wrong about any of these points, I'd be grateful for some education.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
>> Also, how would one run 3DS? Is it possible to run a pure DOS
>> session with NT installed, that would allow 3DS to run?
Nop. That's what I was talking about. Only the simplest DOS program will run
under NT. But that's understandable. DOS, Windows and OS/2 are the mess they
are because they have to support "everything". OS/2 Started right but didn't
get the right support. Even today, regardless how much they brag about having 3
million users, how many of those are using native OS/2 Applications? None as
there aren't any. Every company that had tried the OS/2 marked pulled off.
This is a tough thing to do and it will take time. DOS will stay around for
quite some time. The upcoming Chicago/Windows 4 has its own DOS (they are
undecided if they will ship a separate DOS 7 of just make the whole thing in
one package). That's a half way compromise between past and future. On the
other hand, have you noticed that everybody hates DOS, specially MacTrash
people, but everybody tries to "emulate" x86 code in order to run DOS? Even in
MacTrashes?
It's true, there are a lot of advantages to x486 and dos apps. I'm just hoping
that these advantages will be taken advantage of (weird <g>) in a better
environment. It seems like further evolution of NT and its market will bear
out the results.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
PMJI,
I just had to get in on this. Coming from a background using high-performance
32/64 bit true multitasking GUI operating systems, I initially had a real block
against learning MSDOS. But over time, like John E., learned it's power and
prefer it over Windows in some situations – it can be more efficient.
Conversely, being from a M/T GUI background, I lept into Windows when it was
first available, and was immediately turned off for many reasons already
stated. However, after 3.1 and MUCH research, trial & error, etc., I have been
able to get reasonably high and stable performance. I currently run about 25
Windows app's without hardly ever having problems, except for some beta
stuff…..but it wasn't easy. I agree both DOS and Windows have their strengths
& weaknesses, and I believe NT will accomodate DOS command line style
execution.
As far as the 640k barrier, memory addressing segmentation, and all the other
ancient design limitations kept alive for compatibility, I believe they are
gone with NT. I have not purchased NT yet, as there are not enough NT-specific
coded app's yet, but I believe the only problem running many 3D programs is
with the dongle (won't work with NT). Of course, if not optimized FOR NT, they
are probably going to perform worse anyway. Memory management, DOS Extenders,
etc. currently used by some DOS app's now may cause other problems with NT, but
I imagine they will change as NT evolves. (or DOS dies)
As far as popping from one app. to another directly with 3.1, you can if you
stack your windows properly – not true MULTITASKING – but you can open up your
app's, arrange your windows to accomodate it, and simply click back and forth
between them. (maybe I didn't understand what you are saying ?) Using Win32S
with Real 3D has been an interesting preview towards NT, as you can have
asynchronous operation between tasks running in various windows which switch
priorities on the fly based on the program's logic and user intervention. In
other words, you can have multiple viewports open and interrupt the activity in
one to edit the model, and the others will pick up where they left off
(refreshing, rendering, whatever) whenever there is idle time. Depending on
what you are doing, priority switches to that window when necessary. (simple
example explained poorly). Every task gets completed in logical order without
stepping on the other's performance, it works very well. (of course drawing /
rendering in ALL windows simultaneously with no performance hit to any window
is more desireable <g>)
Hopefully NT will turn out to be reasonably o.k., and resolve many frustrations
not only us user's have, but programmers as well. I know in the years I've
beta-tested 3D software, MOST of the kludginess (word?) of a program and MOST
of the bugs were somehow related to the memory management dinosaur that is part
of DOS/WINDOWS. And by the way, I still use DOS 5.0 as well <g> (somebody else
said that too). I probably will be installing NT pretty soon. I can't wait for
multi-threaded operation utilized by 3D app's. (but I'll probably have to for
quite a while).
Can't remember why I jumped in on this now…….just rambling.
BILL
What I was talking about when popping from one window to another was more like
the unix x windows approach as seen in IRIX or HP Unix where you have
completely seperate multiple sessions going on that don't relate to each other
except for drop and drag, and being on the same CPU (or multiple CPU's) – it's
like working on two completely seperate computers (I'm sure you know what I'm
talking about, you've worked on Unix boxes, right?). This is definitely not
possible in Windows, the feel in 3.1 just is not there.
It seems like we really agree about the rest of it. I use MSDOS a lot, and
know it fairly well for an admitted program moron, and I have only grown to
like windows after getting the right hardware and tuning it to my likes. It's
really stable for me (except an occasional GPF in CsNAV – perhaps the new
version is more stable, I haven't crashed it yet).
I haven't gotten NT for the same reason. There just isn't enough reason to get
it yet – more specific apps, and mainly 3DS needs to be able to run on it.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Hi John,
>> What I was talking about when popping from one window to another
was more like the unix x windows approach as seen in IRIX or HP Unix
where you have completely seperate multiple sessions going on that
don't relate to each other except for drop and drag, and being on the
same CPU (or multiple CPU's) – it's like working on two completely
seperate computers (I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, you've
worked on Unix boxes, right?). This is definitely not possible in
Windows, the feel in 3.1 just is not there. <<
It's late, and I think I'm getting y'alls bug now – but is essentially
what you mean above: SGI=True Multitasking , PC/WIN3.1=Task Switching
?
If so, that's what I was trying to describe with Real 3D's
asynchronous operation under WIN32S. If you consider each of the many
windows I use in that program as a seperate app. running, then it was
an encouraging preview of NT M/T, but under WIN3.1. I've never seen
any other WIN 3.1 app. perform that way though, and it's the only one
I have that requires WIN32S.
>>SGI=True Multitasking , PC/WIN3.1=Task Switching<<
That's exactly what I was talking about. I'm sure we'll begin to see
better multitasking in Windows, and I guess in a couple of years NT
will have matured enough (and 3rd party apps) that I'll be happy to
make the switch (if I'm still using PC's).
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Clap, clap… agree 100% John.
What this retro guys forgets is that, with all the bad things Windows has,
there are still a lot of good things that make it a better choice than any
character based enviroment. Time is running, boys and girls, and there are a
LOT of people tryning to do things with their computers. And that doesn't
include 3D Studio. The name of the game is Word and Excel, not 3DS and
Softimage.
And who says Windows says NT, OS/2, Solaris, NextStep or whatever graphic thing
out there. Let's get real. Everyone here with their Targas, Tips and 3dses
seems to think that they have the best. Of course they have it. But how about
people that need to go beyond a single app like 3DS and a single framebuffer,
like the Targa? It is not a coincidence that the Mac holds the leadership in
the pre-press industry! Windows is leading us to a place in which hardware and
software headaches will be over. If you are running 3DS only and a few DOS
apps, DOS is your nirvanna. But for me, with some other things to do that 3D
work, DOS DON'T WORK.
I don't have to tell you what I will do if the Yost group send me a note
announcing 3DS for NT on AXP computers. HA!
ana /krazy images
We agree on something! Yeah… I knew you were alright <g>.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
>> It is not a coincidence that the Mac holds the leadership in the
>> pre-press industry! Windows is leading us to a place in which hardware and
>> software headaches will be over.
Yea, right. Not until Gates gets the guts to cast aside the entire
installed base of x86 users and code windows the right way. Mac owns
pre-press because of Aldus, Pagemaker, and the mac's ease of use…
isn't it an interesting note that the front page of today's Wall
Street Journal mentions Apple's plans to license its operating system
to outside vendors this year?! Apple doesn't own the industry (thank
god) because it is a closed architecture – that is the ONLY reason.
With the power pc macs coming out and this new announcement, things
are going to be VERY interesting. I love this industry.
>> John, I used to have the exact same attitude as you about Windoze.
You make two important statements here:
1. DOS is nothing but a glorified interrupt handler. True. An
operating system… ok, but not a real-man's operating system.
2. Windows is cool because it's apps are cool. Nobody buys windows for
windows, they buy it for Corel, Ami Pro, Photoshop, etc.
So what we need is a
32bitmultitaskingmultithreadedfaulttolerantoperating system and tons
of cool applications. Fine. But don't deny me a command line! Gawd
do I hate file managers.
I like both command line and file managers. I like to be able to
select a wide variety of files (different names out of a list of…
oh… say… 1000 .tga's), and the only way to do that quickly is
with a windows type file manager. But there's no subsitute for good
ol' command line stuff, like a nice dos window, a couple of good unix
style c-shells, and the ability to move and play with them with a
mouse and editor just like in windows… I guess I'm talking pure
Unix here <g>. I guess NT is moving in the right direction, but I
haven't had a chance to 'really' use it, just tinker with it.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Hey Johnny,
You said something about people who are new to computing. That converts you in
an old to computer guy, right? Now tell me what computer you have used all this
tim, between the release of 4DOS and its current version.\
(Just trying to be bad >-)
ana /krazy images
>> Now tell me what computer you have used all this tim, between the
release of 4DOS and its current version. <<
An Osborne with a Z80A processor running under CP/M. <g>
>> And I've discovered a new utility thanks to Dan O'leary and Gus that
>> makes DOS way cool its called 4DOS. If you don't like DOS but use it ckeck
>> out 4DOS.
Wheeew-wee and yee-haw … another 4DOSser enters the fold! You hit
the nail on the head with your comments regarding windows – I will
NEVER be happy with it until it has a Xterm-style shell with
TCSH-style CLI (that's Unix-ese for 4DOS window with resizeable fonts
and way cool mouseable cut and paste… let your imagination roam).
There are a few things headed this way, but nothing good enough to
make me WIN.
Dan,
>> I will NEVER be happy with it until it has a Xterm-style shell with
TCSH-style CLI… <<
I'm somewhat of a novice when it comes to Unix but I couldn't agree
more. The command line is King and as Gus has said two thousand years
of evolution to provide a neat efficient character set with
incredible flexibility to be thrown out in favor of Icons which will
never have the flexibility of the English command set ie: the
Alphabet! I'm paraphasing here but I believe that's exactly what he
meant. Here's to ya Dan! Thanks.