Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: DOS vs. WIN

  1. #1
    Constant Bitrate
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Charlotte, MI, USA
    Posts
    138

    DOS vs. WIN

    I am looking into getting a MP3 player together. Most of the sites I have read about it are Win9x. Some people have mentioned using DOS. I can imagine that DOS would be faster. How much faster is it? Is a DOS player harder to setup than a Win? Any input would be greatly appreciated.

    - JustAGuy

  2. #2
    Low Bitrate
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    105
    Depends what you want to do.. if the furthest point you want to go with your mp3 system is say a character LCD.. then DOS will be fine..

    I'm running win 98 cause most software is available for this OS and I'm getting a TFT LCD, and DOS would look really crap on it..

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    20
    I recommend DOS.

    Its faster (my P90 can decode at full quality), and doesn't suffer from shut-down problems.

    Starts up faster and takes up less room so more MP3's

    The BEST player is DAMP from

    http://come.to/hedgehog-software/

    Supports LCD, joystick (redefinable), keypads etc.

  4. #4
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    30
    I also use DOS... (well Win95a in a command prompt)

    I can then access Win95a solely to have network capabilities for dragging and dropping mp3s.

    DOS is fast, does the job (so long as you don't want a LCD) and is easily shutdown.

    Graham
    --
    GrahamS
    www.mp3uk.freeserve.co.uk

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    Posts
    24
    Unless you have a TFT LCD, I would go DOS all the way. I've been working on my software for DOS, and it does everything Winamp does and a whole lot more.

    Scott
    http://mpxf.mp3car.com

  6. #6
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    20
    DOS can handle LCD's. It doesn't suffer from shut-down problems and the software is available for free.

    If you use WinAMP, the LCD plug in is very expensive.

  7. #7
    Constant Bitrate
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    199
    You know... it's too bad someone couldn't write a program (or frontend) that runs in dos yet looks like winamp or some other graphical display for usage with TFT screens.

    Kinda like a pseudo-windows look like Partition Magic 4 in dos (hope someone has seen it!) but just a full screen graphical display, maybe even with mouse support!

  8. #8
    Low Bitrate
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    East Brunswick, NJ, USA
    Posts
    72
    I wrote a pseudo-dos 640x480x256 program many years ago 16-bit using SVGACC to give me a standard interface to all of the SVGA chipsets ( it was a mess back in da day ). It had buttons, scrollbars, list boxes, the works ( it was a tile editting program ). I was a kid back then and I did it so certainly someone could do it now using a Scitechsoft DOS library. Any takers? I can throw the source your way for what it's worth. Just don't laugh at it, I was a novice back then

  9. #9
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Posts
    9
    id be happy to take some source or urls to source .. ive done some windows programming but never any for dos. i thought about running linux on mine but samba wouldnt work on a consistant basis so i said **** it at least if i go the dos route it will take up almost no space at all on the drive

  10. #10
    Constant Bitrate
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    199
    Well, it would be cool to have a dos player with the look/feel of something like Winamp. I realize that would kill the thought of running in on a 486, but with prices the way they are who would try that?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •