Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site whuxlb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!gummo!whuxlb!jph
From: jph@whuxlb.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: PC-DOS 2.0 vs MS-DOS 2.0 - (nf)
Message-ID: <1276@whuxlb.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 14-Aug-83 21:00:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: whuxlb.1276
Posted: Sun Aug 14 21:00:28 1983
Date-Received: Mon, 15-Aug-83 01:20:38 EDT
Sender: jph@whuxlb.UUCP
Organization: Bell Labs, Whippany
Lines: 24

#R:rlgvax:-98300:whuxlb:6400009:000:740
whuxlb!jph    Aug 14 21:00:00 1983

I have been following all the discussions about DOS 2.0
on net news and keep wondering if I am using the same
awful piece of software. I have been using DOS 2.0
(from IBM) for the last 5 months and have not had any
problems with it. I have used several software packages
(VisiCalc, KnowledgeMan, Async Comm Support,...) and
they all work just as well (if not better) than with
DOS 1.1.

I have written several assembly language routines to
allow C system calls (read, write, lseek, open, close)
to be done from PASCAL so I can make use of the tree
structured directories and they work just fine. Now I
am sure you can find problems with it (and I have), but
what is the big deal?

A Satisfied DOS 2.0 User

Jim Holtman
...!harpo!whuxlb!jph