Re: Dos Box creepers and more

["J. R. Fox" jr_fox@xxxxxxxxxx]

michael.norman@xxxxxxx wrote:

> Well, the Jordon,

Hi Michael --

A minor point, but I've never seen or heard of anyone with the name who spelled it

"_don." It's "dan."

> occasional discussion about partitioning hard disks to run
> two operating systems -- in this case W98SE (the last Win where Xy SEEMS to
> run okay)

This is much less of a big deal than commonly imagined. I've been running a
multi-OS
system (including one Real DOS partition) since 1997. I wouldn't want to have to
boot
to DOS in order to run XyDOS, though, but since I mainly run OS/2 | eCS, there's
no
need. All you need to have for another boot option is some sound initial
planning, use
of Partition Magic or one of its competitors, the alternate OS, and something to
mediate
the boot choices. NT and later Win versions offered a Boot Manager utility.
Other utilities
like System Commander made this a bit more elegant.

If we're talking about two versions of Win, they should probably not see each
other. This
can be accomplished by having the two alternate C: partitions that you are allowed
to have.
Most shared app.s can be on another, dedicated partition (although, as discussed
here, various
pieces of the installs will insist on going to \System32 of the OS partition
installed for . . .
so these app.s would have to be installed twice). But I've been there and done
that. It works.

> and the more expensive (very) alternative of emulators,
> such as the popular Virtual PC or VMWare.

The emulators have the advantage of your not having to boot to the other Win to
run the DOS
program. But VPC runs around $200., and faster hardware plus extra RAM is highly
recommended to overcome the emulation overhead and give the best performance -- a
further expense.

Jordan