Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Revolting cat!; Advil000
[...] as it was in 1983, it is still a single user machine with a single file version file system, no batch processing facility, primitive command line shell, etc, etc. [...] Compare to what was available in 1983.

Comparing DOS to NTVDM is absurd, without even mentioning PowerShell. One of the best new things in NTVDM is the innate ability to process lists in a FOR loop, making batch processing a cinch. Add to that the ability to use (and the improvement in) jscript, vbscript, and wscript (again, not even mentioning PowerShell), and there is no comparison whatsoever.

48 posted on 09/20/2013 12:35:29 PM PDT by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: roamer_1
(again, not even mentioning PowerShell)

And yet you mention it twice. I was comparing Windows to early Windows (even if I got the early date wrong. And I ran Windows 1.0) So tell me, where are batch queues, with user modifiable priorities, permissions, ownership, etc? A FOR loop has been known since the dawn of programming languages. Batch queues have been known for 40 years or more. Manipulation/management of running processes for as long. Windows yesterday and today is MSDOS with pictures. (Exaggeration.)

51 posted on 09/20/2013 12:52:42 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong! Ice cream is delicious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: roamer_1
Comparing DOS to NTVDM is absurd, without even mentioning PowerShell. One of the best new things in NTVDM is the innate ability to process lists in a FOR loop, making batch processing a cinch. Add to that the ability to use (and the improvement in) jscript, vbscript, and wscript (again, not even mentioning PowerShell), and there is no comparison whatsoever.

Good to know winders finally understands the concept of a 'for' loop.

It's hard to believe it's taken this long.

Too bad microsoft took so long to come to scripting table. (unix has had awesome scripting capabilities forever) Heck, even IBM DOS 7.0 had REXX, which was incredibly powerful. Especially since way back then, when I had either a 486 or maybe a Pentium, you could actually write a script in Rexx that would run on PCs running  DOS, and OS/2, then take that same script and run it on an actual mainframe without changes.

 

68 posted on 09/20/2013 1:56:34 PM PDT by zeugma (Is it evil of me to teach my bird to say "here kitty, kitty"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: roamer_1
I'm kind of interested. How would one do the following in powershell?

$ scp data[1257]-a?.dat zeugma@foo.bar.com:mydata/.

(copy any file in the local directory that begin with "data" followed by any of the numbers 1,2,5 and 7, followed by  "-a", followed by any one single character, ending with ".dat". Copy it to the remote system "foo.bar.com" using my 'zeugma' userid and put it into a subdirectory called "mydata" that is under zeugma's home directory.

 

71 posted on 09/20/2013 2:06:26 PM PDT by zeugma (Is it evil of me to teach my bird to say "here kitty, kitty"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson