Re: thankyou

Re: thankyou
Re: Re: thankyou -- Flo	Post Reply	Top of the thread	Forum

Posted by: Liu
05/07/2006, 17:37:21

Actually things aren't so bad at all depending on how far you would want to go.

Think of the current situation this way: a version of Free DR LX + Wine = the ability to play any Windows games in DOS.

Besides, there is HX32, so I think the ability for DOS to reach the versility of Linux application wise is not far behind.

Post Reply

Where am i? Original Post Top of the thread

Followups

Missed the point? --- 8086 ( 05/07/2006, 18:13:52 ) ( 448 bytes )
Re: thankyou --- Flo ( 05/07/2006, 22:55:58 ) ( 72 bytes ) +1
- Re: DR LX --- 8086 ( 05/07/2006, 23:20:16 ) ( 396 bytes ) +1
  - Re: DR LX --- Liu ( 05/08/2006, 05:59:05 ) ( 679 bytes ) +2
    - THANKYOU --- 8086 ( 05/08/2006, 10:13:17 ) ( 178 bytes )
    - Re: DR LX --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/13/2006, 12:41:34 ) ( 225 bytes ) +1
      - Re: DR LX --- Liu ( 05/14/2006, 18:05:13 ) ( 196 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: DR LX --- lucho ( 05/14/2006, 18:35:41 ) ( 135 bytes ) +2
        
        Re: DR LX Doesn't exist --- Liu ( 05/14/2006, 23:05:27 ) ( 141 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: If DR-DOS Inc. doesn't exist, what about the OpenDOS licence? --- lucho ( 05/15/2006, 08:19:53 ) ( 88 bytes )
        
        Re: DR LX --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/15/2006, 10:08:32 ) ( 293 bytes ) link +1
        
        Re: DRLX --- lucho ( 05/15/2006, 12:11:32 ) ( 526 bytes ) +1
        
        If it exists, DRLX probably violates the GPL --- lucho ( 05/15/2006, 19:25:37 ) ( 226 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: If it exists, DRLX probably violates the GPL --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/15/2006, 21:34:49 ) ( 418 bytes ) +2
        
        Re: If it exists, DRLX probably violates the GPL --- Liu ( 05/16/2006, 06:05:22 ) ( 64 bytes )
        Re: If it exists, DRLX probably violates the GPL --- lucho ( 05/16/2006, 11:20:03 ) ( 684 bytes ) link +1
        
        Re: If it exists, DRLX probably violates the GPL --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/16/2006, 11:54:22 ) ( 575 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: If it exists, DR LX probably violates the GPL --- lucho ( 05/16/2006, 17:05:38 ) ( 366 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: If it exists, DR LX probably violates the GPL --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/16/2006, 17:40:01 ) ( 226 bytes ) link +1
        
        :-x Re: Solera Networks and DRDOS Inc. --- lucho ( 05/16/2006, 19:57:39 ) ( 621 bytes ) +2
        
        Re: Solera Networks and DRDOS Inc. --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/16/2006, 22:57:37 ) ( 870 bytes ) +2
        
        Re: What is DR LX? --- lucho ( 05/17/2006, 08:16:22 ) ( 28 bytes )
        Re: Solera Networks and DRDOS Inc. --- Liu ( 05/21/2006, 19:43:54 ) ( 356 bytes )
        
        Re: Solera Networks and DRDOS Inc. --- bttr ( 05/21/2006, 16:46:48 ) ( 42 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: DR LX --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/21/2006, 19:27:13 ) ( 452 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: DR LX --- lucho ( 05/22/2006, 11:47:37 ) ( 43 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: DR LX --- 8086 ( 05/22/2006, 11:58:21 ) ( 329 bytes ) +2
        
        Re: DRLX --- lucho ( 05/22/2006, 17:49:31 ) ( 150 bytes )
        Re: DR LX --- Flo ( 05/22/2006, 19:45:25 ) ( 262 bytes ) +1
        
        :-x Re: DR DOS Incorporated --- lucho ( 06/13/2006, 17:42:33 ) ( 291 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: DR DOS, Inc. "virtualised" --- lucho ( 06/18/2006, 08:51:41 ) ( 93 bytes )

The DR-DOS/OpenDOS Enhancement Project