[fpc-pascal]Re: fp under Windows

[Marco van de Voort]

> >As 2000 is the 'future' of 32-bit Windows, 2000 is based on NT, and NT doesn't
> >do DOS, except through emulation.. um.. you'll still lose your *DOS* prompt
> 
> Well, i doubt that. First of all they changed the name as i mentioned to 
> "Command prompt" and if i would gamble, i would make a bet that "console 
> mode" will be available even in all future versions too. You even can start 
> W2K in a "recovery console mode" which doesn't have a GUI either. And even 
> on Linux you still have console access... ;-))

So do I. As long as Textmode is the default startup mode of a PC.

> >at some point. I wouldn't personally touch ME with a bargepole..

Neither would I. I work at an ISP, and ME *has* problems, also relative to
98. The network part is bad, and the new driver model causes conflicts
with the old. AND it is slower and bigger.
On the other hand, it packages some new drivers :-)

> >I found 98
> >bad enough (had to use it quite a bit recently).. NT is definately the way 
> >forward.
> Sorry, Matt, but I think this is one of those exaggerated anti-Windows 
> attitudes. I use Windows 95SR2/98SE, Windows ME, NT4.0 and W2K every day at 
> home and at work and i have only minor problems with ALL of them (and Linux 
> too). I get my work done on all of them, and that is what matters (at least 
> to me)....

NT/2000 is significantly more stable, but is a little harder to
configurate, and a bit less tolerant towards legacy (win 3.11 and dos) apps.
NT moreover doesn't support longfilenames in a dosbox. (for dos programs,
not win32 programs like FPC/Win32)
 
ME adds nothing and causes problems. 98 is simple, straight and
compatible.