Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!ucsd!mvb.saic.com!ncr-sd!SanDiego.NCR.COM!booboo!davel
From: davel@booboo.SanDiego.NCR.COM (David Lord)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: dos 3.3 or 4.01
Message-ID: <1991May21.223053.7138@donner.SanDiego.NCR.COM>
Date: 21 May 91 22:30:53 GMT
References: <5345@network.ucsd.edu> <1991May15.191539.30708@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <1991May21.011146.14519@disk.uucp>
Sender: news@donner.SanDiego.NCR.COM (News Owner)
Reply-To: davel@booboo.SanDiego.NCR.COM (David Lord)
Organization: NCR Corporation, Rancho Bernardo
Lines: 18

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?

If you're buying a new system, especially one with a big disk, get
DOS 4.01. The only reason to get 3.3 is if you are running old versions
of old programs. Nearly everything released within the past year or so
is completely compatable with 4.01. I've run Windows, WordPerfect,
Turbo C++, Borland C++, Mix Power C, Norton Utilities, Qemm, Aporia,
Word for Windows, Hyperdisk, SimCity, Railroad Tycoon, and lots of
others and am not aware of any problems relating to 4.01. Being able
to have one large disk partition is IMHO invaluable (I have two 65meg
disks). Ignore the wimps who tell you to stick to 3.3. They'll still
be running that when the rest of us are happily running DOS 873.5 or
OS/15.