4 ms·

Myth: “DOS does not multitask”

6 points by snvzz 3y ago

WantonQuantum 3y ago
I used Desqview all the time in the 90s on my 286. Very responsive switching between, for example, WordPerfect 5.1 and a terminal program to connect to my university via a modem.
defrost 3y ago
DR-DOS (1988) gets a tiny mention "Concurrent DOS" (1984)... provided the basis for what would become DR-DOS. but arguable deserves more, it was the first of the DOS family to utilise high loading and break free of the infamous "640K ought to be enough for anybody." mindset. Unmentioned but worthy .. SideKick and other Terminate, Stay Resident (TSR) DOS programs. Not so much true multitasking .. but they gave the illusion by allowing fast switching between a carousel of running programs. Borland compilers, Sidekick, and other tools made IBM PC's and clones ideal home development terminals for peons that couldn't afford a VAX, PDP-11, Cyber 205, etc of their own. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borland_Sidekick https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borland_Sidekick
- snvzz 3y ago
  >break free of the infamous "640K ought to be enough for anybody." mindset. Note that the PC platform has never truly broken free. Even today on x86-64 with UEFI, Linux and most popular OSs do not just avoid the high area (640KB to 1M), but actually skip the whole first megabyte, leaving it unused. Fortunately, the PC platform finally is on its last legs, as seen with the desperate attempts such as Intel APX to save it. Instead, it is getting replaced with RISC-V. This cannot be avoided, as RISC-V is inevitable.
archo 3y ago
Task Switching vs true Multitasking.
- tssva 3y ago
  The examples given in the article are true multitasking and not task switching. For instance he highlights DESQview which had true multitasking but the only mention of its predecessor, DESQ, is to point out that it provided task switching but not multitasking.
  - archo 3y ago
    True, but there is not delineation as to which flavor of DOS in the Title.
    - tssva 3y ago
      It is shocking that all the content of the article is not in the title.
      - archo 3y ago
        fair point, still the Title is a bit baity.
archo 3y ago
-- Related -- Myth Tested: DOS Can’t Multitask https://hackaday.com/2023/08/09/myth-tested-dos-cant-multitask/ https://hackaday.com/2023/08/09/myth-tested-dos-cant-multita... (no comments - yet) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37072321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37072321

6 points by snvzz 3y ago

I used Desqview all the time in the 90s on my 286. Very responsive switching between, for example, WordPerfect 5.1 and a terminal program to connect to my university via a modem.

defrost 3y ago

DR-DOS (1988) gets a tiny mention "Concurrent DOS" (1984)... provided the basis for what would become DR-DOS. but arguable deserves more, it was the first of the DOS family to utilise high loading and break free of the infamous "640K ought to be enough for anybody." mindset. Unmentioned but worthy .. SideKick and other Terminate, Stay Resident (TSR) DOS programs. Not so much true multitasking .. but they gave the illusion by allowing fast switching between a carousel of running programs. Borland compilers, Sidekick, and other tools made IBM PC's and clones ideal home development terminals for peons that couldn't afford a VAX, PDP-11, Cyber 205, etc of their own. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borland_Sidekick https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borland_Sidekick

snvzz 3y ago
>break free of the infamous "640K ought to be enough for anybody." mindset. Note that the PC platform has never truly broken free. Even today on x86-64 with UEFI, Linux and most popular OSs do not just avoid the high area (640KB to 1M), but actually skip the whole first megabyte, leaving it unused. Fortunately, the PC platform finally is on its last legs, as seen with the desperate attempts such as Intel APX to save it. Instead, it is getting replaced with RISC-V. This cannot be avoided, as RISC-V is inevitable.

archo 3y ago

Task Switching vs true Multitasking.

tssva 3y ago
The examples given in the article are true multitasking and not task switching. For instance he highlights DESQview which had true multitasking but the only mention of its predecessor, DESQ, is to point out that it provided task switching but not multitasking.
- archo 3y ago
  True, but there is not delineation as to which flavor of DOS in the Title.
  - tssva 3y ago
    It is shocking that all the content of the article is not in the title.
    - archo 3y ago
      fair point, still the Title is a bit baity.

archo 3y ago

-- Related -- Myth Tested: DOS Can’t Multitask https://hackaday.com/2023/08/09/myth-tested-dos-cant-multitask/ https://hackaday.com/2023/08/09/myth-tested-dos-cant-multita... (no comments - yet) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37072321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37072321