Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu!mig
From: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: dos 3.3 or 4.01
Message-ID: <1991May15.191539.30708@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 15 May 91 19:15:39 GMT
References: <5345@network.ucsd.edu>
Sender: usenet@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Network News)
Reply-To: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir)
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 15
Nntp-Posting-Host: cunixb.cc.columbia.edu

In article <5345@network.ucsd.edu> nbeck@weber.ucsd.edu (Nathaniel Beck) writes:
>I am getting a new 486 and Gateway will install either Dos 3.3 or
>4.01 at my option. With an 80M HD it would be nice to avoid having
>C, D and E drives using Dos 4.01. But I remember that a while ago
>people shied away from 4.01 because it was reputed to be buggy. Is
>this still the case, and should I stick with tried and true 3.3?

No.  According to all reports (I haven't used it but plan to), Digital
Research's DR DOS 5.0 is superior to DOS 3.3 and DOS 4.* but totally
compatible (except for DOS utilities, of course).  Otherwise, I would stick
with 3.3.

 * * * * * * *  ======================= Meir Green                 
* * * * * * * * ======================= mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu 
 * * * * * * *  ======================= N2JPG