Community Discussions
Explore the latest discussions and community conversations related to this domain.
triple j found the original 'porque no los dos?' old el paso girl : australia
Main Post: triple j found the original 'porque no los dos?' old el paso girl : australia
Is Divinity Original Sin 2 worth buying and playing?
Main Post:
I absolutely LOVE Baldurs Gate 3, I’ve put a couple hundred hours into it and it’s easily jumped into my top 3 favorite games of all time. I’ve played the story a few times and I’m 100% positive I could play it more and still find/see things I’ve never seen but part of me also wants to play this same style of game with a fresh new story and characters and I know Larian made DOS 1 + 2. Obviously they won’t be as great looking and what not compared to BG3 but I wanted to know if it’s still worth buying and playing through or will just not compare to BG3 and slightly disappoint me? If not, should I just buy DOS2 and play it or go back even further and start with DOS 1?
Top Comment: PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY: DO NOT SKIP Check out our FAQ for information regarding creating builds and other general questions. For the Community Wiki, lore, and other details, check out the pinned Weekly Q&A Post. You can find it under the 'Hot' filter on desktop or 'Hot Posts' on Mobile. There is information there that may already answer a question you may have. I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Does anyone even play Dos (Card Game)?
Main Post:
I saw Dos in the store the other day and have never heard anyone play it in my life. I saw the rules were pretty complicated and wondered if anyone has ever bought/played it. Don’t know that I would.
Top Comment: I used to love it! But then I bought a copy of a newer game called Windows. It’s marginally better. Now I’m thinking about buying Apples to Apples.
What is MS DOS? Was it like what Unix is to FreeBSD, the kernel for previous Windows versions up to ME (ignoring 3.1 NT)?
Main Post:
Don't berate me if I'm saying something dumb, I'm not the most knowledgeable 15 years old nerd
I previously thought that MS DOS was the kernel for older versions of Windows, but it came to my attention that you could previously buy and install MS DOS as a command line OS for your computer?
I just want to clear up some confusions I have about it.
Top Comment: MS DOS is a complete operating system people used on their computers standalone before Windows was a thing. It was experience very similar to previous era of 8bit home computers where you used (mostly) BASIC commands on a command line editor to interact with computer and its peripherals - mainly disk with files hence Disk Operating System. DOS allowed you kinda same - either run built-in commands or (load and) run programs. Programs would mostly be text or text ui ones, graphics was possible too but required a lot of direct programming and was used mainly by games. Most of interaction with hardware was very direct and low level (through BIOS). Early era Windows (1, 2, 3.11, 95, 98 and ME) were in fact “programs” starting from DOS and providing GUI and advanced features on top of it - such as multitasking (ability to run more programs at once and switch between them). From 3.11 and 95 it became a little bit more complicated to draw line between DOS and Windows as these versions provided their own API for program developers and some abstraction of hardware access taking over most DOS responsibilities. It was designed like that because in early days a lot of people depended on DOS programs which depended on direct hardware access and running them in “emulation” layer (as NT did) was mostly impossible on average PC (I think you could run Windows 95 on 12MHz 386 with 4MB RAM) back then. If you want to experience how DOS was like to use try DOSBox which is program for Windows/Mac/Linux that will give you emulated DOS environment inside a window.
Does anybody still use dos?
Main Post:
When I started teaching myself to program my mother-in-law tells me that she learned dos back in the day. I'm just wondering if anybody still uses that.
Top Comment: No, but I sometimes use DOSBox to play old games.
What's DOS?
Main Post:
I have seen many laptops in online shopping platform and I have this so called "DOS" What's that and what's the difference between DOS and windows. Also I have seen some reviews saying that this laptop has no windows. Is it because it's DOS? Let me know
Top Comment: I feel old now...
Why is there no modern equivalent of DOS?
Main Post:
This question bugs me from time to time. I don't really get why there isn't some kind of user oriented OS that is primarily just a shell you spin up programs from. Obviously, I'm not forgetting the existence of GNU/Linux, but the solution of "Just use Linux" isn't quite satisfactory. In the same manner, stuff like Windows Server Core isn't the same as it's just a GUI command prompt window with the inability to open applications outside of itself.
I'm quite partial to DOS because I've spent the vast majority of my life using Windows and DOS. I prefer the sort of paradigm they go for over that of Linux based systems. I like the extra freedom you generally have in where things are installed to and how they're laid out, as well as just overall preferring that sort of style in a personal computing sense.
Linux systems are great for servers, but it's much less necessary to have something with the robust multi user model and permissions of Linux in a system only one or a few people will use. DOS basically just lets you do whatever you want with it, and that level of user control is very appealing.
A lot of times, I see people move over to Linux based systems not because they like it, but because it's the next best option over the bloated and ever-increasingly unusable Windows. While I don't entirely agree with all the premises put forth in it, this article made me wonder why we don't see things that just build upon the underlying Windows kernel. It's common for people to move onto Linux just to have to fight their programs and games to make them function on the platform.
Personally, I'd really like a system where I basically have a Windows cmd shell with some basic task switching to enable multitasking. It'd be great to be similar to DOS in having an autoexec.bat and config.sys to take full control over what you load and don't load. A large benefit of this is the ability to natively run Windows applications without needing the full extent of Windows.
Of course, the people who would enjoy this sort of thing are a minority in computing, but I always wonder why I see absolutely nothing about it. It would make sense that Microsoft may make this kind of thing impossible due to trying to protect their kernel, but things like Wine on Linux exist so I'd imagine it to be theoretically possible. I wouldn't be surprised if someone tried to do something like this before, but most things in the nature of similar stuff like FreeDOS are only focused on legacy programs rather than adapting the experience to modern systems.
Top Comment: Dos has evolved into Windows+powershell. You can run a server edition if you want a gui free experience, but it can’t be completely gui free like it used to be. Dos doesn’t keep kernel mode and user mode separated as well as it should and it died a quiet death with Windows Me.