CONFESSIONS OF A COMPUTER LUDDITE
(or "How I learned to stop worrying and love DOS", with apologies to Stanley Kubrick)

 

The other day I put my favourite Perry Como tape in the old 8-track, relaxed in my favourite lazy boy chair with the "lava lamp" going full tilt, and contemplated - as I have dozens of times before - upgrading to Windows N (where N is a large number).  I know that surveying is a high tech industry and in order to stay on "top of our game" surveyors must

... but as one who USED to be on the leading edge of computer science (oops, I mean information technology) back when the Apple® II was state of the art, I have to question the need to stay SO current that you are always in a state of confusion and "learning".

 

Currently, I use DOS as my main operating system and Wi.., Wi.., Windows 3.1 (THERE, I've said it!) as a supplement.  Windows is only there, however, to access the Internet and to allow me to use a decent word processor and accounting program; all my "work" programs (ie. drafting, calculation) are still DOS driven.  Now don't get me wrong, I am just as computer literate as most - why only last year I upgraded to DOS 6.22! - but I question the efficacy of a total commitment to the Windows system.  Imagine purchasing, for example, the latest theodolite only to discover that, while the literature was correct - you CAN measure 5 km. with a single prism - unfortunately, all your old tribrachs, prisms and targets will not work on the new unit!  Most of us wouldn't stand for it and I'm sure a few choice words would be aimed at the salesman for not advising us of that "minor" glitch.  Of course he would reply with something like ...

"Well, the prism and tribrach technologies have advanced considerably since you purchased your last instrument. You NEED to upgrade in order to take full advantage of the new features ...".

 

You get the picture.  Yet most of us bite our tongue when, for example, we receive a file from a client, saved in Word version N (where N is a large number) and are totally unable to read it!  Serves us right for not upgrading!

 

I have used AutoCAD® release 12 (for DOS!) for some years now and upgraded to that from release 10 only reluctantly.  I have also played with release 14, running under Windows NT (short for "Not Trouble-free") and found it somewhat lacking in ease of use and speed.  Add into the mix the fact that release 14 has a smaller working drawing area (due primarily to Windows) and that many of custom Lisp routines and menus would need to be modified "to take full advantage of the new features" (representing many hours of work) and I concluded that this trip was not really necessary.  While I am on the topic, I should say that I tried at least 5 or 6 times (unsuccessfully) to make Windows NT my main operating system; I had heard that it was the "only stable version of Windows".  In each case the system ran fine "for a while", but then ultimately caused me a lot of time and grief:

  1. system crash - system unbootable,
  2. operating system components altered or erased by installation of new software - constant system errors,
  3. unable to integrate ZIP drive effectively,
  4. etc.

My ONLY recourse was to completely eliminate all vestiges of "NT" (re-format necessary, by the way) and go back to my plaid smoking jacket - DOS.  Not that DOS is perfect; I remember crashing it back in 1993.  I "almost" had to re-install it, but - no, wait, that was Windows 3.1.

 

It is interesting to note that one of the most complex "personal" (should be "impersonal") operating systems in the world comes with a 118 page manual, and that's INCLUDING the index!  Why, it's so simple that a manual is not necessary, UNLESS something stops working.  When that happens, it is usually impossible to "trouble-shoot" the situation - your only option is to re-install something and HOPE that does it.  If re-installation doesn't fix the problem, you might as well try adjusting it with your 6 pound (oops, I mean 2.5 kilogram) hammer -see instructional hint following.  I purchased Windows NT in it's beautiful shrink wrapped box and discovered immediately that:

  1. I was out the equivalent of about 60 really good lunches,
  2. The browser included with it was older than the one I already had,
  3. A new browser was included on a companion CD, but
  4. I needed to upgrade to "service pack 3" in order to install the browser. Fortunately, this was included on the same CD, but,
  5. The "current" service pack for Windows was 4 (now 5 or 6, at least!).

 

Service pack 4 was very important because it provided "critical" Y2K fixes for the Windows system (like, they didn't know THAT was coming?).  I could easily obtain it over the Internet - an 80mb file!  I figured with my old reliable Atari modem this would take about 4.1 days (I'd have to do it on the long weekend), not allowing for coffee breaks or wind speed. And Y2K! - well, don't get me started!

 

I happen to know a little something about programming on a PC, and an equally little something about Windows programming, although I don't do it (because I know a little something!).  A "normal" PC program consists of pieces of code that use the operating system (usually through interrupt calls) to accomplish rather arcane things such as disk access, screen access, etc.  Of course some code is just there to move things about or do necessary calculations; that is true of the Windows environment as well.  The main difference between DOS and Windows programs is that Windows programs MUST lay roasted lambs and plates of figs at the feet of the "almighty Task Manager" or he will smite them and cause them to "stop responding to the system".  Much code is dedicated, in other words, just to keeping Windows going - communicating with other programs (for what purpose?) and providing information to Windows (what is my name?, what am I doing?, how long will I be doing it?, on a scale of 1 to 100 - how important is what I am doing?).  All this chatter causes programs to become much larger than necessary, rather like the scrawny, ageing cat who fluffs himself up just to appear a worthy opponent.  My current (self-written) calculation program - QDCalc, for example, uses a collection of machine language routines to handle text windows (borders, open, close, etc.) which is around 700 bytes long.  That's right, not 7 megabytes, but 700 bytes!  The latest version of Windows (Windows 2000, as of Wednesday, or is it Windows ME?), on the other hand, requires more than 1 gigabyte of disk space for a complete install.

 

Rumour has it that the next version of Windows - I believe it's "Windows 2001, a space idiocy" - will be so big and complex that you'll need 2 computers to run it, one for Windows and one for WinRC (Windows Repair Companion).  WinRC runs at the same time as Windows, networked to the other computer, and constantly tries to fix the problems that Windows creates.  The 2 computers must be kept in separate rooms so that they can't see each other - sort of a double blind ... oh, never mind!

 

So here I sit, content in my Formica tower of ignorance, unable to justify the leap to a higher level of Windows.  I feel somewhat like a Bart Simpson - "under upgraded, and proud of it!".  But I AM content in the knowledge that I can still calculate and draft with the best of them, and this on a DOS machine!  Luddites (Winddites?) of the world unite - DOS is alive and well and living in my computer!

 

Now if I could just get DOS to recognize my new Hyper-Mungo talking video card with 128mb memory and 6 gazillion colours.  Doesn't this $#%&*! thing come with a manual ... Oh, crap - it's not responding to the system...

- Allen Titley, BCLS, self-proclaimed Winddite

Hint: how to adjust image height

 

 

Post script:
The above was written when Windows 95 was "state of the art", and Windows 98 was "just coming in".  Sometime after these ramblings were written, I finally upgraded (I mean it, REALLY!) to Windoze 98, Second Edition.  Alas, my cards have been forced. In fairness, the process has been quite painless, although, I have still crashed Windows (ShutDown reports - "this application has stopped responding to the system", and TaskManager [<ctrl-alt delete>] freezes!) on more than one occasion.  And I still run DOS! (...but don't tell anyone).

 

Post-post script:
After some years of living with the minor annoyances of Windows 98, I upgraded both my hardware (I needed a MUCH bigger hard-drive to house all the fluffed-up Windows software) and software; I now use Windows XP Professional.  In fairness to Microsoft, I believe they finally got it right.  Windows XP

XP is not perfect (some previous Windows programs simply do not run!), and does not run DOS programs as "nicely" as Windows 98 (XP has no real DOS software layer, as Windows 98 did), but on the whole has provided a reliable system.  I still run true DOS, however, as a dual-boot, since I still use some irreplaceable DOS-based software.

 Back to SRS Home