Re: DOSEMU/DOSBOX question

[J R FOX jr_fox@xxxxxxxxxx]

--- peregrine@xxxxxxx wrote:

> I've been following this thread with mild interest.

> But just to contribute to our academic understanding
> of all this, I looked into how Dosemu and DOSbox
> display files on my two Ubuntu Linux boxes. I
> configured XyWrite 4.018 to run in DOSbox on one, in
> Dosemu on the other. A quick look confirmed what's
> been said here about Dosemu, and showed DOSbox to be
> more like my memory of MS-DOS. DOSbox is slower
> (maybe innately or maybe only as I have it
> configured, and I haven't tweaked that configuration
> since I started using Dosemu almost a year ago).
>
> If anyone is interested in a more detailed
> comparison, I'm set up to do it and I'd just need an
> outline of criteria you want to compare.

Yes, I think the bottom line for any of us who at
least monitor this topic -- also with mild interest --
is going to be whether DOSBOX in fact offers the
better set of compromises one could live with. You're
right, though: the U2 thing *is* a big deal.

Someone else just mentioned the business about W2K
drivers availability becoming a problem. (The W2K
product "End of Life" date can't be far off, either.)

XP will likely be around for a good while though, as
Vista seems to be a bust, and those clever Mac
commercials have been smacking Redmond around rather
nicely.

Well, my answer to that is: no one will be forcing you
to change at gunpoint. I'm about to completely redo
the tower system, replacing a P3-based lineup with a
circa 2006 motherboard and dual-core AMD. I'm
expecting that this will provide ample horsepower for
anything I might wish to do with a computer for at
least a few more years -- without much in the way of
driver issues. Of course, Xy will remain very much in
the mix.

 Jordan