Subject:
|
Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Oct 2000 11:21:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
620 times
|
| |
|
|
Yes, I run original LDraw.exe from Win 3.1/DOS 6.22 three times a year (in my 486/25 at my parents' home). I also use
DOS versions of Arj.exe and PK[Un]Zip in batch procedures and when I want full control.
I will probably use a DOS machine when (or rather, if) making animations, as my best animation program is for DOS, and
Micro$oft drops more and more of DOS support with every new Winbug version. Modern animation programs make small
pictures with poor quality, make huge files, demands enormous CPU power, and yet the animations won't even run smoothly.
So, I get better full-screen animations with my 486/25 with 8 Mb RAM than with my PII/450 with 128 Mb RAM! :o( That's
why I still sometimes stick to DOS.
- - -
I didn't like the idea of having other constants besides p for patterned, but time may have come that we are forced to
use other for different themed. Like t for Town, s for StarWars, or better Space, and so on.
/Tore
Todd Lehman wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> > Longer term, we are going to need a different, better solution for this.
> > Anyone have any suggestions?
>
> I can't remember the last time "dropping DOS support" came up, but it seems
> like a very long time ago! Is "real DOS" (not real-mode DOS :o) still really
> something that needs to be supported? I understand that DOS as a filesystem
> format needs to be supported, but since Micros~1 added the ~ thingie in file
> names, "DOS" (e.g., pre-NTFS Windows) could support long filenames.
>
> Does anyone still use an old version of PKZIP that won't support filenames
> longer than 8.3?
>
> Does anyone still run DOS the OS? (Meaning real, actual DOS -- like 5.0, etc.)
>
> --Todd
--
Tore Eriksson
Sweden
ICQ: 76066510
LEGO: MOC++++ FS,SP,TO++ TC+ LS YB@m
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Patterned Parts Numbering
|
| (...) I can't remember the last time "dropping DOS support" came up, but it seems like a very long time ago! Is "real DOS" (not real-mode DOS :o) still really something that needs to be supported? I understand that DOS as a filesystem format needs (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
