Print 56 comment(s) - last by Visual.. on May 22 at 9:46 AM

Windows 8 may not excite some, but Mr. Martin makes a compelling case why even Windows XP may be unattractive

Windows 8 is proving to be a release much like Windows Vista for Microsoft Corp. (MSFT).  Sales have been good, but not great, and the internet has been filled with hate.  Lambasted by internet critics, Windows 8 has failed to push Microsoft's user base away Windows XP.
I. A Game of DOS
The argument made by many is that Microsoft’s previous operating systems -- Windows XP, or more recently Windows 7 – were considered the pinnacle of OS design. And those critics complain that the choices Microsoft made in its new operating system(s) was (or were) mistakes that regressed the utility of the product.
Author George RR Martin -- perhaps the most prominent living master of fantasy fiction -- has offered up an intriguing set of views on this OS debate.  And while his views are a bit outside the mainstream, it's interesting to see how they echo the opinions voiced by Windows Vista and Windows 8's detractors, including the Windows XP-for-life crowd.

George RR Martin
George RR Martin is a king of fantasy fiction. [Image Source: Nancy Newberry]

Fellow writers closely scrutinize Mr. Martin largely because he's ascended to both commercial and critical acclaim with his seven-book saga A Song of Fire and Ice.  Adapted into cable TV's most pirated and perhaps hottest series -- Game of Thrones -- the storyline is currently in its home stretch on the book front, with Mr. Martin working on the final two novels.

Game of Thrones
Game of Thrones is one of the most popular shows on cable television. [Image Source: HBO]

It might surprise some, but Mr. Martin has published the first five books in the series not on a modern operating system like Windows 8, or even a mildly aged one like Windows XP, but rather on a positively ancient one.

He comments in an appearance on Conan -- comedian Conan O'Brien's hit program on Time Warner Inc.'s (TWX) TBS:

I actually have two computers. I have the computer that I browse the internet with, that I get my email on and I do my taxes on. Then I have my writing computer, which is a DOS machine not connected to the internet. Remember DOS? I use WordStar 4.0 as my word-processing system.

I actually like it, it does what I want a word-processing programme to do and it doesn't do anything else. I don't want any help, you know?

I hate some of these modern systems where you type a lower case letter and it becomes a capital. I don't want a capital. If I'd wanted a capital, I'd have typed a capital. I know how to work the shift key. Stop fixing it.

Thus in a Windows world Mr. Martin is still stubbornly sticking to a tried-and-true predecessor from a simpler time. 
II. The Perfect OS?
For those unfamiliar with the "perfection" that was/is DOS, DOS stands for "disc  operating system".  Mr. Martin's choice of MicroPro's WordStar 4.0 -- a software that launched in 1987 and was replaced by WordStar 5.0 in 1989, suggests he purchased his computer in 1987 or 1988.

Before Windows, there was DOS. [Image Source: Computer History Museum]

Further, while multiple DOS existed, by that time one particularly version -- Microsoft's MS-DOS -- had come to dominated nearly all personal computer sales (other than designs from Apple, Inc. (AAPL)).  At the start of 1987 MS-DOS 3.1 and 3.2 PCs were on sale.  In August 1987 Microsoft released MS-DOS 3.3, which shipped that holiday season.

Microsoft announced MS-DOS 4.01, which including advanced extended memory support (EMS), large partition sizes up to a whopping 2 gigabytes, and powerful multitasking.  It seems probable that Mr. Martin had either an MS-DOS 3.3 or an MS-DOS 4.0.1 PC -- let's hope for the latter.

MS-DOS 4.0
MS-DOS 4.01 came out in 1988. [Image Source: Computer History Museum]

Windows did exist at the time (Windows 1.0 launched in 1985), but was rather crude and in some ways less powerful/usable than the more refined text-line OS, DOS.  In 1988 Microsoft's latest and greatest version of Windows was Windows 2.1.  Mr. Martin would start writing his first novel in the series (A Game of Thrones) in 1991.  By August 1995, he was courting publishers, and Microsoft was releasing Windows 95, which relegated Mr. Martin's favorite OS (MS-DOS) to somewhat of a backup capability, typically relegated to use for bootstrapping, troubleshooting, and backwards-compatibility with older apps.
Mr. Martin published his book a year later in 1996.  

A Game of Thrones
[Image Source: eBay]

Meanwhile, his favorite OS's downgrade to companion product would continue on newer PCs through Windows ME, the last Microsoft OS to feature a fully integrated version of MS-DOS.  Later Windows NT operating systems, such as Windows XP would include a command line tool that offered MS-DOS-like features via emulation, but the days of MS-DOS as a full-fledged OS were over.
III. Aging OS is Hacker-Free Haven, if Crude
This is actually not the first time Mr. Martin commented in a 2011 post to his LiveJournal blog (humorously entitled Not a Blog):

So here's the thing. I am a dinosaur, as all my friends will tell you. A man of the 20th century, not the 21st. Yes, I have been using a computer for twenty years now, but while I cruise this interwebby thing with a PC and Windows, I still do all my writing on an old DOS machine running WordStar 4.0, the Duesenberg of word processing software (very old, but unsurpassed). I have my website, which someone else runs for me, and I have this LJ account, the blog that I vainly called my Not A Blog in hopes that might prevent me from blogging.

But that's it.

I am not on Facebook.

I am not on Twitter.

I will not be on the next new thing to come along, the one that makes Facebook and Twitter as obsolete as GEnie and CompuServe and The Source, those halcyon communities of yore.

George RR Martin
George RR Martin doesn't use Facebook or Windows. [Image Source: ABC News/George RR Martin]

In a crazy way there's some truth to Mr. Martin's criticism of his peers' use of newer operating systems.  Fantasy writer JK Rowling suffered leaks of parts of her final Harry Potter series of books.  OJ Simpson's infamous book If I Did It leaked before publication.
In 2008 Stephanie Meyer had been working on a follow-up to her best-selling Twilight series, which would have retold the story from the point of view of the male vampire protagonist, Edward Cullen.  After part of her manuscript was stolen, she quit the project.  She remarked that she was "too sad about what has happened to continue working on Midnight Sun."  Her critics rejoiced, but her fans were devastated.
More recently Candace Bushnell (author of the book Sex and the City, which was turned into a popular series) was the victim of hacking May 2013, having a manuscript of a new book leaked.  And in Jan. 2014, Quentin Tarantino was so devastated by the leak of his script for a movie adaptation of the book The Hateful Eight, that much like Ms. Meyer he shelved the project indefinitely.

Quentin TarantinoQuentin Tarantino shelved work on The Hateful Eight after hackers copied the script off his PC and leaked it to the world. [Image Source: Grantland]

Mr. Martin's fans can sleep soundly, though.  The fantasy veteran is unlikely to be hacked anytime soon, so long as his manuscripts sit in the trusty MS-DOS.
Mr. Martin's secret weapon was even the subject of satire when in 2012 wrote a piece (presumably with tongue planted firmly in cheek) that claimed hackers had infiltrated Mr. Martin's computer and had leaked a draft of how A Song of Fire and Ice would end.  In an alternate timeline the story might be true, had he used the newer internet-connected Windows operating system.  
With that in mind, one must begin to wonder if maybe Mr. Martin is right -- if we should forget not only Windows 8, but Windows XP as well, and just stick with good old MS-DOS.

Sources: Team CoCo on YouTube, Not a Blog [George RR Martin's blog], BBC News

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

There's some validity in that
By dgingerich on 5/16/2014 11:19:29 AM , Rating: 3
Seriously, though, an older, more simple OS with no networked connections is something that would provide immense security. Nobody would be able to hack it. There would be fewer things to go wrong. It wouldn't crash nearly as often.

On the other side of the coin, floppy disks are far more fragile than other storage methods. An older system is more likely to have a hardware failure. Older programs don't have as many features as the newer ones, but if you don't use those features, why pay for them? (I happen to use notepad far more than any word processor on my computer, even at work.)

I don't see anything wrong with this.

RE: There's some validity in that
By WLee40 on 5/16/2014 11:29:58 AM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah, forgot to mention the benefit of not being plugged in and having a secure system in my comment. I agree.

RE: There's some validity in that
By ViewRoyal on 5/16/2014 2:44:41 PM , Rating: 1
Even DOS can be hacked. That's why I only use my trusty abacus. ;-))

RE: There's some validity in that
By Jeffk464 on 5/16/2014 3:12:41 PM , Rating: 5
Isn't any system that isn't networked secure? He could have a win7 laptop with no network connection and then toss it in a safe when he isn't working on it.

RE: There's some validity in that
By kleinma on 5/16/2014 3:51:03 PM , Rating: 2
depends on what you mean by secure.

Of course these are extreme measures you would likely only hear about in spy movies or leaked NSA documents, but certainly scary none the less.

By Cypherdude1 on 5/18/2014 4:53:15 AM , Rating: 2
Isn't any system that isn't networked secure? He could have a win7 laptop with no network connection and then toss it in a safe when he isn't working on it.
As long as he doesn't boot off any floppy he exchanges with the outer world, he's OK. Because DOS is so old, nothing is updated including anti-virus software. He has no anti-virus protection so he better not boot off any floppy he gets from his publisher or anywhere else. He also better not run any program off any floppy from the outer world.

Regarding floppies being more delicate than CD's or DVD's, that's not really true. I still have 3½" floppies and they all still work OK. However, my system does not have the old style floppy connector. Years ago I bought an IDE LS-120 drive which can read and write standard 3½" 1.44 MB floppies and also 120 MB floppies. I disconnected it and taped the front, for dust prevention, because I never used it. I use USB flash sticks instead. No other PC in the house uses floppies so it's obsolete, except perhaps for flashing BIOS.

WordStar 4.0 does have a feature which no other word processor has. WordStar can work with column text. Say you have a list of a few thousand lines. They all have the same structure and you want to eliminate the first, last or anywhere in-between item. As long as each item on every line takes the same number of characters, you can use WordStar to delete it. WordStar can work with all the columns of text from the first line all the way to the last line and delete whatever columns of text you wish all at the same time. Other word processors would require you to go line by line manually deleting every single item, a very tedious chore. As far as I know, NO other word processor has this feature, not WordPerfect X5, not M$ Word 2010, no one. Yes, WordStar 4.0, the best word processor ever, can save you a LOT of tedious work.


RE: There's some validity in that
By Rukkian on 5/16/2014 11:42:32 AM , Rating: 4
You can always shut off the network connections on a newer os and get the same basic thing. While it will still be more complicated than simple dos, you can also do much more with it.

It is really not that Dos is more secure, the books and manuscripts could have been protected by only writing on any computer (mac, linux, windows, or dos) on a computer without network connections. Once you open up network connections and connect that computer to the internet it is always more vunlnerable. There is a reason that high security, like in a government data center is not connected to the general internet. If you work is that important to you, then secure it one way or another.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Nortel on 5/16/2014 11:51:44 AM , Rating: 2
He must save to hard drive and floppy. The drive would be very unlikely to be in raid 1/5 and with the old system that would pose a big risk since MTBF has long past on that drive (if original).

By deathwombat on 5/16/2014 11:59:02 AM , Rating: 5
I keep old DOS machines alive using an adapter that allows CompactFlash cards to connect to PATA. CF cards are internally IDE, so all you need is a passive adapter to make them looked like an IDE hard drive to the BIOS. Now your old DOS computer has a slow SSD!

I use low capacity CF cards but, in theory, you could use larger CF cards and give them multiple 2 GB partitions.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Argon18 on 5/16/2014 1:17:24 PM , Rating: 2
"big risk since MTBF has long past on that drive"

Not necessarily. Even old early 1990's desktop hard drives had MTBF of 100,000 hours, which is 11 years. That's 11 years of powered-on usage. Assuming he only powers the machine on when he's working, and powers it off when he's finished, he's still well under 11 years.

At 8 hours of usage per day, 7 days per week, that's ~34 years to reach the MTBF spec. Even longer if he doesn't work on the weekends.

All this assumes his computer is still equipped with its original hard drive and was never upgraded or replaced. Plus I'm sure anyone working on such a long-term project as a novel, will be backing up their data regularly.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Etsp on 5/16/2014 11:48:50 PM , Rating: 3
MTBF is not a good indicator of how many years something can be running before it fails.

For example, if a manufacturer warrantied a drive model for 2 years, they would only run the MTBF test drives for two years. At the end of that period, they calculate the MTBF, and then shut all the drives down and don't look at them anymore. They say, "MTBF is 12 years" based upon that.

Could be that there's an issue on the platter motor that makes it wear out and die after three years. Doesn't change their MTBF, but most of the drives sold will die within 5 years.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Fritzr on 5/17/2014 1:03:39 AM , Rating: 2
In addition the the floppy drive emulators, MS-DOS has native mode CD-ROM drivers.

Using CDRW (rewritable CD-ROM) he can exchange data without resorting to emulation or antique drives. At worst he would get a PATA-SATA adapter to connect a SATA CD drive to the old machine.

The floppy emulators that use memory cards are easier to use, and since he is happy with a modern system for browsing the interweb, it is likely he is sticking with the old tech because it "simply works" without any need to relearn the most important tool he uses daily because the designers hid everything when they "improved" the software with the latest update.

RE: There's some validity in that
By b534202 on 5/16/2014 1:21:48 PM , Rating: 2
You can burn CDs and back up to tape in DOS.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Dorkyman on 5/16/2014 6:10:14 PM , Rating: 2
Ha! You say "tape," but real men use paper tape.

I like to be able to see my data.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Samus on 5/16/2014 2:03:05 PM , Rating: 2
Just the fact his PC likely has no USB ports and the only way to backup data is on floppy provides immense modern-day security. If somebody broke into his house to copy data off this computer, odds are there is a 1 in 1000 chance they are equipped with the tools to copy the data. Most of the time they'd be carrying a USB drive or expect an internet connection to transfer the file across.

If I were a high profile author, I'd consider a solid copy of Word Perfect 5.1 as well. I still use an IBM Modem M 88 but I love cutting edge technology all the same (hence why I read this site.) Some things at the golden era of PC were just better. Just look what happened to hip hop.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Zak on 5/16/2014 2:35:56 PM , Rating: 2
"It wouldn't crash nearly as often" -- that part is just not true. Every newer OS is more stable than the previous one. Windows 95/98 and OS9 had to be rebooted daily if not severe times a day.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Jeffk464 on 5/16/2014 3:25:43 PM , Rating: 1
I don't remember my moms 1992'ish mac crashing very much, if at all.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Solandri on 5/16/2014 11:58:26 PM , Rating: 3
Macs were the last major OS to ditch cooperative multitasking (the OS relies on the programs to give back control of the CPU). They didn't make the switch to pre-emptive multitasking (the OS always controls which programs get CPU time) until OS X, a year or two after Win2k. That means any badly behaved program could hang Mac OS.

While Mac OS and its apps were generally better-behaved than early Windows (Win 95/98/ME basically ran on top of a custom version of DOS, and was never very stable), they did crash every day or three. If you only used a narrow selection of programs which happened to be stable, you didn't see as many (or any) crashes. But if you had a wide variety of programs and drivers installed, a crash a day was not unusual.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Jeffk464 on 5/17/2014 7:35:08 PM , Rating: 2
That sounds reasonable, Apple has always controlled the hardware so you didn't have the driver crashes that you had/have on windows. I remember switching from win 98 to win2000 and was shocked at how reliable an OS could be, probably more of a statement about win95/98.

RE: There's some validity in that
By Jeffk464 on 5/16/2014 3:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
If he continues his current trend he won't have to worry about security. The first three books were beyond excellent and the 4th is suppose to be a dud that doesn't go anywhere. I hope it doesn't follow the trend of the Wheel of Time series where it starts great and then just wanders around from there.

I remember
By WLee40 on 5/16/2014 11:28:34 AM , Rating: 2
I remember those old DOS days. I liked wordstar but so much prefer a GUI. There is something to be said of the simplicity if you remember/know all the keyboard commands. Funny how some people stubbornly resist change. No disrespect intended...

RE: I remember
By Solandri on 5/16/2014 12:02:33 PM , Rating: 3
For those of you too young to remember, back in the 1980s pretty much any secretary's resume had to include "proficient with WordPerfect hotkeys" or it'd go straight into the trash. One of the biggest problems people had (and still have) with many GUIs is that keyboard shortcuts and hotkeys are so much faster than navigating a menu or ribbons. The catch being that you have to learn and memorize them.

That's actually one of the things that upsets me about Windows 8. They changed several of the navigation hotkeys (e.g. creating a new folder used to be alt-f w f. I don't think there's a hotkey for it anymore).

Anyway, Unix was (and is) better than DOS. :D

RE: I remember
By drlumen on 5/16/2014 12:12:11 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. The WordPerfect keyboard template was intimidating at first but keyboard shortcuts were/are so much faster than having to find things with a mouse.

RE: I remember
By kmmatney on 5/16/2014 2:09:56 PM , Rating: 1
I still have a hard time finding things in the MS Word ribbon, although I've been using the ribbon for over 2 years (office 2007). Maybe it works for people who use Word everyday, but I only use it a few times a week so easily forget where things are.

RE: I remember
By Cheesetogo on 5/16/2014 12:35:43 PM , Rating: 2
Hahah... Ctrl Shift N

By purerice on 5/16/2014 1:24:14 PM , Rating: 3
A few months ago I went through my parents' garage and found 4 Vintage '90s computers with everything from Win 3.1 to MacOS 7.6.

The UI was FAST back then. MS Office was FAST.

Why is it that a 2+ghz multicore machine can't even keep up with a 33mhz 486 when it comes to running Microsoft apps?

RE: faster
By dashrendar on 5/16/2014 1:58:33 PM , Rating: 3
They were fast back then because they didn't do anything.

Actually, did you run them recently or are you going off by memory? 'cause I think your memory is telling you that it was fast back then but if you run it now you might see that they were really slow.

Plus, our patience has grown thinner in the past 20 years.

I don't know what I'm talking about.

RE: faster
By kmmatney on 5/16/2014 3:15:55 PM , Rating: 2
I wrote my 300 page Engineering Master's thesis in Word 2.0, using Windows 3.1. The PC was a 100Mhz Pentium. You'd get the hourglass any time the info had to be taken from the hard disk, but when things were taken from memory is was lightning fast. In a virtual machine on my laptop, I can boot up Windows 3.1 in about 3 seconds.

RE: faster
By solarrocker on 5/16/2014 2:16:06 PM , Rating: 2
I remember running my Atari 1024ST with color monitor.

It didn't had any hard-drive, everything loaded from floffies. It was damn fun to program on and play games with (Had the first Flight Simulator).

But it def. was NOT fast in anything. Mostly because had to load everything from floppy. The only machine that was fast back then was the old 286 machine we had with 20MB hard drive. Could boot up in under 3 minutes into windows 3.1 and later we even put windows 95 on it. I remember playing DoomII on that machine as well as dune 2. As for faster back then not really.

Ah the nostalgia value though...

By M'n'M on 5/16/2014 11:46:38 AM , Rating: 3
DOS stands for "disc only operating system".

Hmmmm, really ? Someone didn't have their cooffee and doonut this morning ? :)

By sheh on 5/16/2014 12:24:09 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, unclear.

DOS = disk operating system.

By rudolphna on 5/16/14, Rating: 0
By Dr of crap on 5/16/2014 12:25:40 PM , Rating: 2
ITS Disc Operating System, as I remember it.

Not sure where the only comes from.

Hope he makes backups
By subflava on 5/16/2014 12:05:02 PM , Rating: 2
Hope he makes backups...

Also, I wonder what computer this is that it's still running after all this time. You'd think the caps or something would have failed by now.

RE: Hope he makes backups
By MindParadox on 5/16/2014 2:26:35 PM , Rating: 2
Ive got a tandy 1000tx and a 1000rl/hd that are still working perfectly, the TX was built in 87, the rl in 86 :)

And, I have a Zip drive hooked to them both, so I can easily transfer and backup stuff 100 megs at a time

By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 5/16/2014 2:36:28 PM , Rating: 2
Presumably he prints drafts at some point, so worst case there's a scannable 'backup' available.

Plus, if he wanted, he could always back up via Laplink or X/Y/ZModem.

File Format
By drlumen on 5/16/2014 12:08:26 PM , Rating: 2
It makes me wonder about all the gyrations he has to go through to get his book from wordstar on msdos to his publisher. Does he overnight 5.25" fdd's with the hope they have some system that can read them?

Just curious...

RE: File Format
By MindParadox on 5/16/2014 2:31:35 PM , Rating: 2
Not many, zip drive could easily transfer, USB floppy drive on the newer system, hell, direct serial cable link is still a working situation, alto today it would be USB to serial, since most modern motherboards don't have serial ports anymore

Also, for the hard drive in the old system, the XT-IDE project made it possible to use new drives, and CF cards and such as replacements in the old systems.

By Nekrik on 5/16/2014 4:19:39 PM , Rating: 3
So he's resistant to both change and learning modern computing techniques, not really a big deal and not surprising. Any version of Windows could replicate the same work environment (as far as feature parity) if he just used Wordpad instead of a full blown word processor. For that matter, using VI on a *nix box could do the same just as well, all he needs to do in either case is unplug the Ethernet cable.

Point from all this
By blwest on 5/19/2014 12:06:40 AM , Rating: 3
The biggest thing I pulled from all this is quite simple:

Having the newest, best, latest smart phone, computer or tablet doesn't make you a better person, author, content creator or programmer. It's all up to the knowledge you have in your head. The technology is simply an assistant or extension to help you along the way.

@*@$*$#*# much?
By Visual on 5/22/2014 9:10:32 AM , Rating: 1
Further, while multiple DOS existed, by that time one particular ly version -- Microsoft's MS-DOS -- had come to dominated nearly all personal computer sales

Apparently, modern word processors do not auto-correct grammar too well.

On topic, the old guy must be a tech wizard, to keep that machine still running.

RE: @*@$*$#*# much?
By Visual on 5/22/2014 9:46:00 AM , Rating: 2
Interesting filter you got there, replacing "proofread" with "@*@$*$#*#" in my title... I take it you don't like being corrected.

oh that makes sense
By kizle on 5/16/2014 2:02:03 PM , Rating: 2
So the problem is the O.S. and not the INTERNET CONNECTION?
Well without an network connection, regardless of the O.S., ofc he wont be hacked DUH.

By jardows on 5/16/2014 2:09:15 PM , Rating: 2
When you think of it, if you take out Music and Video editing, Modern WWW, and Professional graphics, what would you actually do on a computer that you could not do in DOS?

The only thing that really comes to mind is easy task-switching and multi-tasking. That is the one "killer" task that makes a modern windowing system necessary, and MS-DOS obsolete for regular use. There have been some non Microsoft DOS programs that are mult-user and work akin to the Unix ctrl+alt+fx switching, but those are usually specialized and (relatively) expensive to purchase.

Upgrades are Coming
By Voldenuit on 5/16/2014 2:43:43 PM , Rating: 2
GRRM kept meaning to upgrade to Windows but never got around to it.

Weak sauce
By inperfectdarkness on 5/16/2014 3:16:25 PM , Rating: 2
I use an electric typewriter.

Newer is not always better
By ProZach on 5/16/2014 4:44:52 PM , Rating: 2
It seems probable that Mr. Martin had either an MS-DOS 3.3 or an MS-DOS 4.0.1 PC -- let's hope for the latter.

Uh, version 3.3 was not nearly as buggy or slow as 4.0. Also there was some static where there existed PC-DOS (IBM) and MS-DOS (Microsoft) in version 4.0, which I speculated that may have been part of why 4.0 was rough since the collaboration between companies started to divide.

DR-DOS 5.0/6.0 was excellent and really made MS have to concentrate on delivering a good MS-DOS 5.0, but that didn't stop them from crippling DR-DOS functionality in Windows 3.x (aka the smoking gun OS discrimination code).

Conan who?
By DT_Reader on 5/16/2014 5:59:46 PM , Rating: 2
He comments in an appearance on Conan -- comedian Conan O'Brien's hit program
LOL! "hit program" Please stop, you're hurting me!

Any OS is hacker proof . . .
By Bateluer on 5/16/2014 7:42:35 PM , Rating: 2
If you've disconnected it from the Internet. Disconnect the ethernet cable, don't install a WiFi card. There, your PC is as secure as it can be until someone physically breaks in to your domicile and makes off with the tower.

By chick0n on 5/16/2014 8:59:37 PM , Rating: 2
Thats because you are an idiot, blame it on others cuz of ur own stupidity? Hah!

By Chaser on 5/16/2014 9:06:42 PM , Rating: 2
Ravens, of course :)

By Morg72 on 5/18/2014 9:36:43 PM , Rating: 2
My first computer had DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.11 for Workgroups and I spent almost all my time using DOS, often running memmaker when I wanted to install a new game like The 7th Guest, MechWarrior 2, Warcraft 2 or Ultima 8. I will never forget the computer specs:
Intel 486/66 - DX2
1MB Western Digital Paradise GPU
256MB Western Digital HDD
Sound Blaster sound card
Double speed CD-ROM
5.25" Floppy
3.25" Floppy

I also remember the salesman telling my Mom that we couldn't fill a 256MB HDD in 10 years so going for the 512 HDD was a waste of money...MechWarrior 2 was a 110MB install so I usually had to remove PrintShop and WordPerfect to make room for it, lol.

Ahh, the good ole days...

By Integral9 on 5/19/2014 8:12:06 AM , Rating: 2

That's the sound a paragraph makes when he reaches the end of one. :)

By atechfan on 5/20/2014 8:37:31 AM , Rating: 2
The guy is an author. His craft is words. He doesn't need the formatting, graphics, charts, HTML capability, or anything else that comes with a modern version of Word. All he needs is something that puts what he types into a file. So he sticks with what he is used to. In no way is this any implication that DOS is any way superior to Windows, whether XP or 8. Or OSX, Linux, whatever.

Don't know why people are making a big deal about this. There are many applications, such as industrial machining, warehouse logistics, and yes, writing, that still use DOS because they still work.

ASCII Wieners?
By Mitch101 on 5/16/14, Rating: 0
"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki