Also what are some advantages and disadvantages of DOS and Windows?

DOS: Good because it is small and fast and can be run on real slow computers with little amounts of Disk space and RAM. Bad because some users find it hard to use and it can't multitask

Windows: Allows you to run more than one program at a time (multitask) some people find it easier to use. Has a more standard interface and more graphical programs. You can also run newer programs. It's bad because it requires more Hard drive and RAM and CPU speed. If something goes wrong it can be harder to fix. This is more evedent with newer versions of Windows.

windows is buggy and slow, wastes resources, it can't handle memory properly...it puts you through loops of stupidity to get anything done, advertises multitasking which it can bearly hack which the human mind can't handle anyway. The only advantage is that most software is created for it.

Dos advatanges; it's stable, effecient, fast and straight to the point. Anything else?

More pennies.

Learn both as a better job can be found and held onto.

Many people today have no clue how to use dos. They only use Windows and are lost if an Icon is not present.

The key to any program is knowing how to use the "stupid " help file.

Dos is small and fast. With a little front time a menu can be made for hundreds of task.

And then there is windoze.

Everything else has already been said.

W.L.

Before you diss windows remember macintosh. The macintosh has a Cooperative Multitask that doesn't work right (as apposed to windows 9x and Unix's that have 32 bit preemptive) it has no keyboard shortcuts so it your mouse goes you're screwed, it wastes more resources. Imacs have a difficult to use mouse, and it is even stupider.

Oh why not? Windows is needed to drive the market. Without Microsoft's bloatware the hard drives would still be only 512mb, new motherboards wouldn't be needed, large memory modules wouldn't be needed, cdrom drives wouldn't be needed, fast video cards wouldn't be needed, and of course the internet wouldn't exist. How is that for extreme?

Dos is just not demanding enough to drive the technology sector, but as an OS it beats windows.

Your question's a little like comparing the advantages of potatos vs. french fries.

the internet would too exist.
and so would high powered systems etc, they wouldn't be needed as much, that's all.
there would probably be a new dos with 32bit code, too :)
- W0rm

In today's world you are lost if you use DOS.

Disavantages: Extremely limited, difficult to setup many basic functions as opposed to a GUI OS. No company toady would dream of using DOS DOS = OUT OF BUSINESS BEFORE YOU GET STARTED. Apart from it's size it has few advantages. Can you imagine a system server running on DOS. Ha HA. Forget DOS. Most users (home and work) never need it and don't know of its existence or whether of what it stands for.

I mean would you rather have a Maxi or a Ferrari?

hey helper,

Consider yourself...well, flattered as we kabosh each of your bombastic and pseudo-current assertions.

We're far from "lost" in DOS. It cultivates path/file awareness and we enjoy much more control over our 'puters.

What's so "extremely limited" about DOS? It launches the widest possible variety of apps...including Win 3.1/95/98, and yes, even Win ME. Moreover, we reduce windoze to where it belongs...just another line in our DOS batch files.

Whereas real-mode DOS offers no server capabilities as such, it is FAR, FAR more stable than ALL windoze...including NT/2000.

Precious little functionality has been added to Word processing, spreadsheets, dbasing and accounting as a result of windoze.

If I may add, the dreary regimen of bloat-crash-reboot-scandisk-upgrade-freeze-more reboot has actually diminished the business/data based productivity of personal computing.

Thousands, if not more, businesses have a nimble, stable DOS based accounting system -- quite unfettered by presumptuous "wizardry" and the mindless treadmill of upgrades so characteristic of "post-DOS" bloated leverageware.

So, junior...take your Ferrari, or whatever, and get back on the sidewalk.

lol. you took the words straight from my mouth! :)

but one more thing, "helper". I know of several businesses who use different OS's, and I can tell you that Windows costs them the most hassle and money of all.

A good example of this is the secretaries, who attempt to do their work but lose it to a freeze/crash, they end up having to redo all of the work, staying after hours...being paid twice as much. Then there's the fact that windows machines cost about a grand more.

- W0rm

kerri: It all depends on what you want to do. Each OS (Operating System) has its pros and cons. Windows has a cleaner interface and allows multi-tasking (which is a very important feature - most people have no idea how much actually goes on behind the scenes thanks to it). DOS is very quick and straightforward for most things, but can be very limiting being only a single-task environment and also a 16-bit one at that. I agree with the concept that DOS is very easy to repair when it breaks when compared to Windows. Windows is also very large and bloated - most Microsoft products are (just look at Office 2000.) But the idea is to suit what you feel comfortable with. You can do a lot with either OS. If you feel safer pointing and clicking your way along, opt for Windows. If you like having a little more low-level control over your system, try DOS. Actually try them both and see which you prefer. I run just about every OS known to man and each has its own little task it's especially good at. Suit your own needs - that's all that really matters anyway.

Absolutely right Doomsday! These "which is better" discussions/arguments never get anywhere, for the reasons you outlined. I use both Win95 and WinNT, but often use DOS progs or batch files to perform file/data manipulation.

You buy whichever software and hardware does the job for you, and which you feel comfortable with.

For example, I know of a car repair business which uses an old 286 machine with DOS progs. to do all their invoicing, payroll, etc. and have no need to change at all! They've used this setup since the 80's, and don't NEED Windows xx or modems or laser printers or even a mouse to run their business efficiently. Horses for courses.

Looks like one of them HOMEWORK reports to me.

Major Networks do not use DOS, Windows 31/95/98 anyway! They use NT or UNIX (YES Yes, and others!) No self respecting company would trust Windows! As for DOS it still has arole in Manufacturing and simple things in life (Like Cash Machines) as for use as a main OS yes it is past its best. But dead, NO.

Helper obviously has not been around to long because he knows not what he is talking about. Dos is not difficult to setup. I guess it might be if you use Windows & point & click on the pretty little icon pictures to get things going but dos is extremely easy. While you are saying forget dos are you forgetting your in a dos forum. Why are you here? Seems you have no need for it by your comments. You might need to ease on over to the Windows forums. I know businesses where I live that use it. True the alot of businesses dont, but I know some that do & some schools also. So talk what you know, which doesn't seem like very much. Windows is a bore to me. Not all people like the pretty graphical icon pictures. We are not in kindergarten.

...and more to the point,

the often forced icon-like operation of windoze is a throwback to prehistoric and preliterate times...when ideas were only communicable via crude graphic symboling.

The comparing potatoes to French Fries was interesting. If you think about it, we are talking about two kinds of computer. One operating system is best for each kind.
One computer is for doing work, and the other one is for playing on the internet.
The work computer needs to run databases, do word processing of various kinds and spreadsheets. The play computer needs to be
fun and easy to use and to emphasize mouse clicks.
Well, DOS is best for work and Windows is best for fun in my opinion.