I just finished Terje Mathisen's review of Novell DOS 7 (``Novell's Newest DOS,'' June). While some of the problems he was having with OS/2 and Windows for Workgroups 3.11 can be avoided by turning DPMI=OFF in his EMM386.EXE statement, I sympathize with him. It seems that Microsoft's DPMI [DOS Protected Mode Interface] implementation clashes with that of Novell.
A friend introduced me to DR DOS 6.0 years ago. After much tweaking, it worked flawlessly with any program I tried. Despite the excellent technical assistance I have had from Novell, Novell DOS 7 still crashes randomly, with a screen dump citing invalid commands. This happens with something as simple as CHKDSK.
But I have come up with the perfect solution. Until Novell fixes Novell DOS 7, I've reverted back to DR DOS 6.0. It's too badthis DOS really would have given
Microsoft something to strive for in its upcoming 7.0 version.
Ed Berlot
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
That parallels my own thinking; I loved DR DOS 6 and hoped that Novell DOS 7 would be good enough and stable enough to use on any machine. No such luck! --Terje Mathisen
I am very unhappy with Terje Mathisen's review of Novell DOS 7. Instead of showing the two products side-by-side in the real world, he suggested how much more ``complicated'' ND7 is than MS-DOS 6.2. Why the real, substantive differences between MS-DOS 6.2 and ND7 were completely bypassed is beyond me.
I suppose if you're a Windows user and are used to that ``one size fits all'' mentality, then, yes, Novell's DOS is too much for you. You've probably got Chicago already charged to your Visa and got dizzy reading OS/2's box. Forget NextStep.
The hope is that ND7 will inspire a war among operating systems: Who can provide the best multitasking (MS-DOS 6.2 misses), who can link the PCs in a network (Hello, Microsoft?
We're waiting!), and so on. The sad reality is, we're slipping into a Neanderthal void as the ease-of-use advocates pound the daylights out of the functionality advocates.
Carl H. Payne
Orem, UT