 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/08/2013 2:45 PM, clipka wrote:
> At least some editions of Windows also provide a shortcut in the start
> menu, in the "accessories" submenu, called "command prompt" (IIRC).
My version has an "Open command window here" as an entry in the context
menu (right click) in explorer.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/08/2013 4:11 PM, Warp wrote:
> Stephen <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote:
>>> I remember win95, a good user interface with DOS - where is DOS now?
>
>> Hidden in the command prompt box: cmd.exe
>
> cmd.exe is a program, not DOS...
>
True it is a command-line interpreter.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/08/2013 08:26 AM, scott wrote:
>> Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with a simplified UI existing. If
>> there's a product specifically for people who just want to surf the
>> Internet and send a few emails, then that's great! What I object to is
>> *me* being forced to use that same product.
>
> You do realise if you get the "desktop" version of Win8 you get the
> standard Win7-like desktop too? It's only the "RT" version for low
> powered mobile devices that consists solely of the new GUI.
If that's only the cut-down version, then why is all the marketing
material based on it?
Also, the laptop we purchased to test Windows 8 with came with that
awful UI too, so...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> But hey, MS makes a metric tonne of money per hour, why would they even
>> care what I think?
>
> I remember win95, a good user interface with DOS - where is DOS now? I have Win7
> and I hate it because I can't use my own old programs. But (or install Linux)
> there is no way to avoid MS empire. And as you say, MS take all the power of the
> PC and consider the user like a child - no big responsabilities for the user, it
> is dangerous to modified all that stuff.
> Where is (except Linux) the possibility to make your machine, like you want. MS
> format the users. It's a fact.
The vast majority of end-users couldn't give a fig how much "control"
they have over the PC. They just want to be able to *use* the thing. I
have no problem with MS making computer technology easier for them to
use. (I would debate the degree to which they achieve that, mind you...)
What I *do* have an issue with is MS deciding that *I* can't get stuff
done with my own PC because "most" end-users don't need that feature.
I should probably go buy the competitor's OS instead. Oh, wait...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 27.08.2013 18:56, schrieb Stephen:
> On 27/08/2013 2:45 PM, clipka wrote:
>> At least some editions of Windows also provide a shortcut in the start
>> menu, in the "accessories" submenu, called "command prompt" (IIRC).
>
> My version has an "Open command window here" as an entry in the context
> menu (right click) in explorer.
Actually that's by far the most useful one. Unfortunately it's not
available in all editions/versions - Windows 7 Pro doesn't have it, for
instance.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote:
> "Fractracer" <lg.### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I remember win95, a good user interface with DOS - where is DOS now?
>
> Hidden in the command prompt box: cmd.exe
Yes, I know, but this DOS is not a real DOS, try to launh a program like
Fractint, it can't run.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/08/2013 7:06 PM, clipka wrote:
> Actually that's by far the most useful one. Unfortunately it's not
> available in all editions/versions - Windows 7 Pro doesn't have it, for
> instance.
It should be available by pressing Shift + Right Click. Or made
permanent by editing the registry.
http://blog.deepakazad.com/2012/04/permanently-enable-open-command-window.html
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> I remember win95, a good user interface with DOS - where is DOS now?
>>
>> Hidden in the command prompt box: cmd.exe
>
> Yes, I know, but this DOS is not a real DOS, try to launh a program like
> Fractint, it can't run.
That's because DOS is a monotasking real-mode OS; applications run under
it have complete access to the physical hardware. The command prompt in
Windows is merely a DOS-compatible command interpreter. Windows itself
is a multitasking protected-mode OS. So a program like FractInt which
performs direct hardware access can never work under Windows.
You can, however, run it in a virtual machine if you so desire...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fractracer <lg.### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Yes, I know, but this DOS is not a real DOS, try to launh a program like
> Fractint, it can't run.
If you want to emulate an old obsolete system, use DOSBox.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >>> I remember win95, a good user interface with DOS - where is DOS now?
> >>
> >> Hidden in the command prompt box: cmd.exe
> >
> > Yes, I know, but this DOS is not a real DOS, try to launh a program like
> > Fractint, it can't run.
>
> That's because DOS is a monotasking real-mode OS; applications run under
> it have complete access to the physical hardware. The command prompt in
> Windows is merely a DOS-compatible command interpreter. Windows itself
> is a multitasking protected-mode OS. So a program like FractInt which
> performs direct hardware access can never work under Windows.
>
> You can, however, run it in a virtual machine if you so desire...
Yes, but I remember that MS has developed a multi-task version of DOS. Why MS
has not implemented this version?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
