Talk:DOS - Revision history

24.1.126.128 at 13:26, 30 April 2006

24.1.126.128 — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 13:26:30 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:26, 30 April 2006
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:Well, are we even in thorough agreement that it ''is'' DOS? Even if we're sure it's DOS, which one? DOS is like Linux in that there are multiple builds, each put out by someone else.		:Well, are we even in thorough agreement that it ''is'' DOS? Even if we're sure it's DOS, which one? DOS is like Linux in that there are multiple builds, each put out by someone else.
	::First of all, Annony, DOS and Linux are about as different as night and day. If nothing else, we can be absolutely certain that the Compy 386 runs DOS, as dir/p is a basic DOS command for displaying an unnamed directory and then pausing after every screenful of info. It is most likely that the Lappy also uses DOS, and if it does, then it had to be preinstalled. {{User:Ten Ten/sig}} 11:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)		::First of all, Annony, DOS and Linux are about as different as night and day. If nothing else, we can be absolutely certain that the Compy 386 runs DOS, as dir/p is a basic DOS command for displaying an unnamed directory and then pausing after every screenful of info. It is most likely that the Lappy also uses DOS, and if it does, then it had to be preinstalled. {{User:Ten Ten/sig}} 11:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
		+	:::Besides, Strong Bad's programs are all .exe's or .com's, two extensions for DOS executibles. Linux does not use extensions for executables.

Ten Ten: whoops

Ten Ten — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:51:06 GMT

whoops

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:51, 30 April 2006
Line 2:		Line 2:
	As the devil's advocate, I raised my eyebrow at the claim that each computer he buys has DOS "pre-installed." Could he be running DOS in non-DOS-native machines? Before I tweaked the wording, I wanted to appeal to the more-computer-knowledgeable; is there some kind of proof that his DOS environments have been pre-installed? —[[User:AbdiViklas\|AbdiViklas]] 03:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)		As the devil's advocate, I raised my eyebrow at the claim that each computer he buys has DOS "pre-installed." Could he be running DOS in non-DOS-native machines? Before I tweaked the wording, I wanted to appeal to the more-computer-knowledgeable; is there some kind of proof that his DOS environments have been pre-installed? —[[User:AbdiViklas\|AbdiViklas]] 03:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
	:Well, are we even in thorough agreement that it ''is'' DOS? Even if we're sure it's DOS, which one? DOS is like Linux in that there are multiple builds, each put out by someone else.		:Well, are we even in thorough agreement that it ''is'' DOS? Even if we're sure it's DOS, which one? DOS is like Linux in that there are multiple builds, each put out by someone else.
-	::First of all, Annony, DOS and Linux are about as different as night and day. If nothing else, we can be absolutely certain that the Compy 386 runs DOS, as dir/p is a basic DOS command for displaying an unnamed directory and then pausing after every screenful of info. It is most likely that the Lappy also uses DOS, and if it does, then it had to be preinstalled.	+	::First of all, Annony, DOS and Linux are about as different as night and day. If nothing else, we can be absolutely certain that the Compy 386 runs DOS, as dir/p is a basic DOS command for displaying an unnamed directory and then pausing after every screenful of info. It is most likely that the Lappy also uses DOS, and if it does, then it had to be preinstalled. {{User:Ten Ten/sig}} 11:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Ten Ten: definitely not linux

Ten Ten — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:50:50 GMT

definitely not linux

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:50, 30 April 2006
Line 2:		Line 2:
	As the devil's advocate, I raised my eyebrow at the claim that each computer he buys has DOS "pre-installed." Could he be running DOS in non-DOS-native machines? Before I tweaked the wording, I wanted to appeal to the more-computer-knowledgeable; is there some kind of proof that his DOS environments have been pre-installed? —[[User:AbdiViklas\|AbdiViklas]] 03:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)		As the devil's advocate, I raised my eyebrow at the claim that each computer he buys has DOS "pre-installed." Could he be running DOS in non-DOS-native machines? Before I tweaked the wording, I wanted to appeal to the more-computer-knowledgeable; is there some kind of proof that his DOS environments have been pre-installed? —[[User:AbdiViklas\|AbdiViklas]] 03:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
	:Well, are we even in thorough agreement that it ''is'' DOS? Even if we're sure it's DOS, which one? DOS is like Linux in that there are multiple builds, each put out by someone else.		:Well, are we even in thorough agreement that it ''is'' DOS? Even if we're sure it's DOS, which one? DOS is like Linux in that there are multiple builds, each put out by someone else.
		+	::First of all, Annony, DOS and Linux are about as different as night and day. If nothing else, we can be absolutely certain that the Compy 386 runs DOS, as dir/p is a basic DOS command for displaying an unnamed directory and then pausing after every screenful of info. It is most likely that the Lappy also uses DOS, and if it does, then it had to be preinstalled.

ACupOfCoffee: /* Pre-installed */ ''is'' it DOS?

ACupOfCoffee — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 03:37:16 GMT

Pre-installed: ''is'' it DOS?

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:37, 30 April 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==Pre-installed==		==Pre-installed==
	As the devil's advocate, I raised my eyebrow at the claim that each computer he buys has DOS "pre-installed." Could he be running DOS in non-DOS-native machines? Before I tweaked the wording, I wanted to appeal to the more-computer-knowledgeable; is there some kind of proof that his DOS environments have been pre-installed? —[[User:AbdiViklas\|AbdiViklas]] 03:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)		As the devil's advocate, I raised my eyebrow at the claim that each computer he buys has DOS "pre-installed." Could he be running DOS in non-DOS-native machines? Before I tweaked the wording, I wanted to appeal to the more-computer-knowledgeable; is there some kind of proof that his DOS environments have been pre-installed? —[[User:AbdiViklas\|AbdiViklas]] 03:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
		+	:Well, are we even in thorough agreement that it ''is'' DOS? Even if we're sure it's DOS, which one? DOS is like Linux in that there are multiple builds, each put out by someone else.

AbdiViklas: I can't think of anything clever to say about pre-installed.

AbdiViklas — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 03:21:25 GMT

I can't think of anything clever to say about pre-installed.

New page

==Pre-installed==
As the devil's advocate, I raised my eyebrow at the claim that each computer he buys has DOS "pre-installed." Could he be running DOS in non-DOS-native machines? Before I tweaked the wording, I wanted to appeal to the more-computer-knowledgeable; is there some kind of proof that his DOS environments have been pre-installed? —[[User:AbdiViklas|AbdiViklas]] 03:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)