hod.html

黑客培训教程

  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 3.1</td>
    <td>3-7-85 </td>
    <td>23,210</td>
    <td>9,564 </td>
    <td>27,760</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 3.1</td>
    <td>3-7-85 </td>
    <td>23,210 </td>
    <td>9,564 </td>
    <td>27,760</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 3.2</td>
    <td>12-30-85</td>
    <td>23,791 </td>
    <td>16,369</td>
    <td>28,477</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 3.2 </td>
    <td>7-7-86 </td>
    <td>23,612 </td>
    <td>16,138</td>
    <td>28,480</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 3.21</td>
    <td>5-1-87</td>
    <td>23,948 </td>
    <td>18,501</td>
    <td>28,480</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 3.3</td>
    <td>3-17-87 </td>
    <td>25,307</td>
    <td>22,100</td>
    <td>30,159</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 3.3</td>
    <td> 7-24-87</td>
    <td>25,276</td>
    <td>22,357 </td>
    <td>30,128</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 3.3a</td>
    <td>2-2-88 </td>
    <td>25,308 </td>
    <td>22,398 </td>
    <td>30,128</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 4.0 </td>
    <td>10-6-88 </td>
    <td>37,254 </td>
    <td>32,874</td>
    <td>36,903</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 4.01 </td>
    <td>11-30-88</td>
    <td>37,396 </td>
    <td>33,173</td>
    <td>37,180</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 4.01</td>
    <td> 4-3-89 </td>
    <td>37,396 </td>
    <td>33,173</td>
    <td>37,180</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 4.01a </td>
    <td>4-7-89 </td>
    <td>37,557</td>
    <td>33,337</td>
    <td>37,376</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 5.0</td>
    <td>4-9-91</td>
    <td>33,430 </td>
    <td>37,394 </td>
    <td>47,845</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 5.0</td>
    <td>5-9-91 </td>
    <td>47,987 </td>
    <td>33,430 </td>
    <td> 37,378</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 5.001a </td>
    <td> 2-28-92 </td>
    <td>48,006 </td>
    <td>33,446 </td>
    <td> 37,378</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 5.02</td>
    <td>9-1-92</td>
    <td>47,990</td>
    <td>33,718 </td>
    <td>37,362</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 6.0</td>
    <td> 3-10-93</td>
    <td>52,925 </td>
    <td>40,470</td>
    <td>38,138</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>IBM 6.1 </td>
    <td> 6-29-93 </td>
    <td>52,589</td>
    <td>40,964 </td>
    <td>38,138</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 6.1 </td>
    <td> 9-30-93 </td>
    <td>52,797</td>
    <td>40,964 </td>
    <td>38,138</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 6.2R0</td>
    <td>9-30-93</td>
    <td>54,619 </td>
    <td>40,566 </td>
    <td>38,138</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>MS 6.22 </td>
    <td>5-31-94</td>
    <td> 54,645 </td>
    <td>40,774 </td>
    <td>38,138</td>
  </tr>
  <tr> 
    <td>PC 6.3 </td>
    <td> 12-31-93 </td>
    <td>54,654</td>
    <td>40,758 </td>
    <td>37,174</td>
  </tr>
</table>
<p>**Note: Microsoft had no official version of MS DOS prior to DOS 3.2. Only 
  OEM versions were sold with the PC by the computer manufacture.</p>
<p><b><font size="4"><a name="5"></a>Future of DOS:</font></b></p>
<p>At first, many people would answer saying that DOS has no future. It has seen 
  it's heyday and now it's up to high-resolution GUI's (Graphic User-Interfaces 
  - e.g. Windows 95) to lead the operating system pack. But let's not be too quick 
  to dismiss it. There are many reasons why DOS is an essential part of many of 
  today's finest systems.</p>
<p>Talk to mainstream computer industry &quot;specialists&quot; and they'd have 
  you believe that there is no longer any place for it. Why? Because they don't 
  understand the special speed and performance requirements unique to systems 
  other than &quot;supercomputers with neuro-networking&quot;. I'm talking about 
  the many hundreds of thousands of users that depend on older systems to support 
  their businesses. Low-tech industries rely heavily on computers with old versions 
  of DOS installed on them. The average &quot;business person&quot; here doesn't 
  need anything better than a 486SX with 8MB of RAM to run their MS-DOS based 
  accounting program. This shouldn't be made redundant just because DOS is so-called 
  &quot;outdated&quot;. This is also where the highest resistance to the removal 
  of DOS has come from.</p>
<p>Despite this, many people believe that old DOS programs are becoming redundant 
  because they are not Y2K compliant. But I say that DOS programs are simplistic 
  by nature and can easily be patched to be compatible. Even that seems more sensible 
  than installing Windows and taking up copious quantities of HD space with utilities 
  that have a hundred times more features than you'll ever figure out, let alone 
  use. Don't even get me started on the redundant registry entries and .dll files 
  that remain after 'removing' shareware and evaluation software on Win95. You 
  won't get any of that in DOS!</p>
<p>Win95 and DOS can be compared to bank notes and coin-change respectively. Win95 
  caters for the multiuser/multitasking system which has convenience similar to 
  the spending of large bank notes. DOS caters for the single-task user without 
  the need of extraneous functions and add-ons. Like coins, DOS adds up for too 
  many individuals not to have a large economic impact if it were removed.</p>
<p>One of the great 'new features' of Win95 is it's Recycle Bin (thanks Mac!). 
  But if it's so great, what does a user do if he or she wants to recover a file 
  after having emptied the bin? Nothing? Tough luck? Nope. DOS to the rescue! 
  The user simply needs to 'Restart in MS-DOS mode', type in and confirm the LOCK 
  command, go to the directory where the file was stored (or 'c:\recycled') and 
  undelete it using DOS v6.2x's old UNDELETE.EXE (remember: restart the computer 
  or type in UNLOCK to proceed safely). Conclusion: Windows couldn't have been 
  used to retrieve that 'permenantely' deleted file without using extraneous software 
  (eg. Norton Utilities).</p>
<p>Okay, so I've been heavy-handed about my support for DOS over Windows. Sue 
  me, I like it - it's my 'oldschool'. ;) Although...</p>
<p>Many people support DOS in that they perceive it to be a magical operating 
  system that is just perfect for games. Well I have a challenge for them - TRY 
  PROGRAMMING FOR IT! I'll bet money that half the reason why Interplay's relatively 
  new game &quot;DTUM&quot; didn't ship with network options was simply because 
  it is a DOS game and they would have had to do the bulk of the work themselves. 
  Simply put: if Microsoft wants to write network code for game developers (via 
  Direct Play) or add support to most if not all sound cards (Direct Sound), a 
  designer would be foolish not to take advantage of it. Thus guaranteeing MS 
  role in the games market. Even the mighty Quake(TM) released Windows/OpenGL 
  versions (sell out? - you decide).</p>
<p>Two factors determine the user's productivity: how long it takes to tell the 
  computer to do something, and how long the computer takes to do it. The former 
  is largely dependent on how you've customized your system with shortcuts, macros, 
  and AutoLISP routines and the platform is not particularly relevant. The latter 
  is partly dependent on your choice of platform - any kind of Windows inevitably 
  suffers compared with DOS. Why? Because DOS remains on a lower user level compared 
  to Win95 and thus keeps more of the system's resources free.</p>
<p>Even Windows 98 - the most recent operating system released by Microsoft to 
  date retains elements of DOS for users - obviously Microsoft recognises the 
  great need for it. These elements, however, aren't pure DOS. They're part of 
  Win95/98. A shell (pardon the pun) of its former self if you will. The question 
  is, will Win98 be able to run without these elements? One of the intriguing 
  questions being asked today since the discovery that Win95 works with DR-DOS 
  7.01, is how dependent on DOS is/was Win95? I would have called this myth until 
  I went to fix a Win95 problem and by accident discovered that Win95 appears 
  and runs on top of DOS.</p>
<p>So was it, in fact, essential for Microsoft to retain DOS? Was Win95 already 
  so intricately (/technically) dependent on DOS that the Win98 upgrade wouldn't 
  work without it? Probably not, although speculation is widespread.</p>
<p>I believe that DOS will remain for a few years to come at least. Sentimentality 
  alone can't keep it around forever though and it's only a matter of time before 
  somebody finds a way of phasing it out completely. But not without meeting resistance 
  from individuals for which DOS provides an efficient service. As a DOS junkie, 
  I find it's faster to type many commands or use batch files than having to click 
  and move files around in Windows. What can I say? The mouse slows me down and 
  I think 'user-friendliness' is a sham.</p>
<p><b><font size="4"><a name="6"></a>Postscript:</font></b></p>
<p>I know what many of you are thinking and I agree: MS OS's suck, get Linux. 
  =)</p>
<p><b><font size="4"><a name="7"></a>Bibliography:</font></b></p>
<p><b>BOOKS:</b></p>
<table width="99%" border="0" cellspacing="2" cellpadding="2">
  <tr>
    <td>Author(s): </td>
    <td>Title: </td>
    <td>Publisher:</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Gookin, Dan </td>
    <td>DOS for Dummies (3rd Ed)</td>
    <td>IDG Books International</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Brown, Margaret</td>
    <td> Learning DOS &amp; Windows </td>
    <td>DDC Publishing </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Edstrom, Jennifer </td>
    <td>Barbarians Led by Bill Gates</td>
    <td> Henry Holt &amp; Company </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Erwin, Robynne</td>
    <td>User Friendly </td>
    <td>Wallace Bradely Printers</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Jamsa, Kris A</td>
    <td>DOS : The Complete Reference </td>
    <td>Osborne McGraw-Hill</td>
  </tr>
</table>
<p><b>URLS:</b></p>
<table width="99%" border="0" cellspacing="2" cellpadding="2">
  <tr>
    <td><a href="http://members.xoom.com/mhoulden/dosref.htm" target="_blank">http://members.xoom.com/mhoulden/dosref.htm</a></td>
    <td>Complete DOS reference</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><a href="http://www.microtec.net/%7Edlessard/dos.htm" target="_blank">http://www.microtec.net/~dlessard/dos.htm</a></td>
    <td>DOS history timeline</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><a href="http://www.a1computers.net/pcdoshis.htm" target="_blank">http://www.a1computers.net/pcdoshis.htm</a></td>
    <td>DOS history chart</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><a href="http://clarey.com/dosisdead.html" target="_blank">http://clarey.com/dosisdead.html</a></td>
    <td>DOS is dead forum</td>
  </tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>