http://eyebee.disqus.com/Another Eye To The WorldenSat, 10 Oct 2009 12:07:32 -0000http://wildcabbage.net/anti-not-really-just-not-pro-either/#comment-19791629<p>I bought my first 'IBM-Compatible' PC back in 1986. It came with MS-DOS 3.3 and a set of half a dozen 3.5 floppies marked "Windows 1.0" I installed them, and played with this pretty looking thing for a while. It had a notepad type orgram in it, and a paint program, and, as I recall, not much else. There were no other applications back then.</p><p>I got bored with it after a short while, and deleted it.</p><p>I upgraded a few times over the next few years, but it wasn't until some time in early 1994, when I finally installed Windows 3.1 on my computer. I was more than happy with DOS, and it was, for the time, quite fast and responsive on my 386-based machine with a huge 8MB RAM. Windows turned it into a relative slug, so much of the time, I stayed in DOS anyway.</p><p>I've always thought that those DOS days were of great benifit, as I've never been unable to use, or been intimidated by a command line prompt.</p>EyebeeSat, 10 Oct 2009 12:07:32 -0000http://wildcabbage.net/anti-not-really-just-not-pro-either/#comment-19738841<p>Years ago when a buddy was "teaching" me how to use a computer, we were using DOS. I had the little template sitting above the keyboard and each key offered 3 different steps as you shifyed. Had to jot down lots of notes to myself.</p><p>I asked him about this new "windows" thingy I had heard about and he laughed and said it was just a fad. "Hard to do better than DOS, " he concluded.</p>Chuck BoydSat, 10 Oct 2009 10:50:31 -0000