DOS Operating system

[sanipig18]

i have a Question why is "DOS (Disk Operating System)" or why it is " Commonly Used" in some Call Centers and huge Companies ?
can't find the Answer in google.. can someone help me ?

thanks !

[You_are_a_cunt]

... it's not used. Or at least it shouldn't be used (assuming you're referring to the almost-40-year-old system).

I doubt it's even used for legacy systems (or at least I hope it isn't), similar to how many US nuclear silos are still using 40 year old systems

There is literally no use or reason to use DOS in a company.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOS

[Master Disaster]

Just now, sanipig18 said:

i have a Question why is "DOS (Disk Operating System)" or why it is " Commonly Used" in some Call Centers and huge Companies ?
can't find the Answer in google.. can someone help me ?

thanks !

Who told you it was commonly used?

 

It would be more than useless in a modern call centre, as in it would actually hinder performance to such a point that the call centre ops wouldn't even be able to do their jobs.

 

Besides the fact it only supports a miniscule amount of RAM (I think its 640KB off hand) and has to separate anything above that into separate pools that are exclusive from each other (meaning high memory is not visible to apps running in the upper memeory space and vice versa) it has no native networking support and any networking framework you can install onto it immediately eats all your RAM.

 

The only reason I could see it still being run in call centres is for telephony support but I see no reason why they wouldn't just upgrade to a modern alternative.

[Nuluvius]

On 2017-6-21 at 1:11 PM, revsilverspine said:

There is literally no use or reason to use DOS in a company.

This is completely wrong. There are legacy applications that still require it because it's simply not worth the cost of/no need for porting them (yes even today).

[You_are_a_cunt]

Just now, Nuluvius said:

This is completely wrong. There are legacy applications that still require it because it's simply not worth the cost of/no need for porting them.

Nice necro.

I doubt there are that many legacy applications that only work on DOS that haven't been phased out.

[Nuluvius]

10 minutes ago, revsilverspine said:

Nice necro.

Nice attempt at being passive agressive.

10 minutes ago, revsilverspine said:

I doubt there are that many legacy applications that only work on DOS that haven't been phased out.

Then you'd be wrong twice, for both of your statements. I have experiance.

[Jarsky]

You'll find most of these legacy applications aren't DOS, but are AS400 or similar server applications like Lightspeed that have a terminal interface that looks DOS like. Most legacy software runs on old Unix kernels. 

[Nuluvius]

26 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

You'll find most of these legacy applications aren't DOS, but are AS400 or similar server applications like Lightspeed that have a terminal interface that looks DOS like. Most legacy software runs on old Unix kernels. 

No you'll find that there are some real DOS based application still in use in industry today, as I said. It's my luck that I get to deal with some at one of the companies that I currently work for.

 

This is an example of extreme legacy. Indeed (most of) these particular applications do not see client use as they are largely concerned with proprietary data processing.

[Jarsky]

33 minutes ago, Nuluvius said:

No you'll find that there are some real DOS based application still in use in industry today, as I said. It's my luck that I get to deal with some at one of the companies that I currently work for.

 

This is an example of extreme legacy. Indeed (most of) these particular applications do not see client use as they are largely concerned with proprietary data processing.

My point isn't that DOS applications arent still in use, but they will be for very specific cases like data processing as you pointed out. My point was that *most* (if not all) of what may be perceived to look like DOS from an end user perspective, probably isnt DOS - but is probably a Unix or AS400 type terminal.

 

 

[Nuluvius]

52 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

My point isn't that DOS applications arent still in use, but they will be for very specific cases like data processing as you pointed out. My point was that *most* (if not all) of what may be perceived to look like DOS from an end user perspective, probably isnt DOS - but is probably a Unix or AS400 type terminal.

It seems to me that your point is completely moot.

[Jarsky]

1 hour ago, Nuluvius said:

It seems to me that your point is completely moot.

It seems to me, that your point is also moot, in that it doesn't apply to what the OP is talking about. Call centres do not use DOS. And most large companies do not rely on it, other than for legacy systems - like some old Health sector and Power sector companies. Even then, much of their legacy infrastructure is Unix, OS2, Sun or some proprietary OS.

[Nuluvius]

8 hours ago, Jarsky said:

It seems to me, that your point is also moot, in that it doesn't apply to what the OP is talking about. Call centres do not use DOS. And most large companies do not rely on it, other than for legacy systems - like some old Health sector and Power sector companies. Even then, much of their legacy infrastructure is Unix, OS2, Sun or some proprietary OS.

The question was specifically why DOS applications could still be found to be in use. I really don't see how speculating about the implementation details of other terminal/console applications answers that question.

[divito]

On 7/4/2017 at 2:38 PM, Jarsky said:

You'll find most of these legacy applications aren't DOS, but are AS400 or similar server applications like Lightspeed that have a terminal interface that looks DOS like. Most legacy software runs on old Unix kernels. 

This. Canadian Tire still uses AS400.

Walmart's inventory system (at least in Canada), from what I remember, is COBOL-based, and while there were always rumblings of it being re-done, it's persisted so far. 

[Dat Guy]

I recently heard of a German insurance company which runs their database on DOS. I'm really curious which language was used.

[Nuluvius]

25 minutes ago, Dat Guy said:

I recently heard of a German insurance company which runs their database on DOS. I'm really curious which language was used.

Well the ones that I have had experience of were Turbo Pascal/Delphi.

[Mira Yurizaki]

https://www.cnet.com/news/this-commodore-64-bad-boy-helps-drive-an-auto-shop-in-2016/

 

A Commodore 64 is the main computer used at an auto shop in Poland.

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a16010/30-year-old-computer-runs-school-heat/

 

Also a Commodore ran a HVAC system at 19 schools for over 30 years.

 

Just because it's no longer in mainstream use doesn't mean it has no purpose.

 

However I would like to point out something: while a common attribute of DOS based systems is that they're usually command line driven, a command line interface does not mean it's a DOS. UNIX and Linux were designed to be command line drive, but they are very much a different beast from DOS based systems. So it could be that they're "common" because someone doesn't know any better.

 

But otherwise, I've seen apps that look like they were meant for MS-DOS in some places, like at Fry's for their inventory system, but it also looks like they're run in a VM. Also fun fact: Intel still makes network drivers for MS-DOS (the last one released 6/19/2017).

[Guest]

On 6/21/2017 at 8:05 AM, sanipig18 said:

Snip

My bank used DOS for quite a while. 

The reason was they already bought DOS and replacing it would be very expensive. It would be thousands of copies of windows, and if it ain't broke... don't fix it. 

 

A second comlonbtrend would be "why do corporations still use pentiums and core 2s?" Because its expensive to upgrade. If the pentiums and dual cores still work don't replace them.