From: TURTLE              
To: SNAKEBYTE           
Subject: Dr DOS         
Date & Time: 04/16/90 01:53:04
Message Number  3740

DR-DOS is, in fact, not MS-DOS; it's smaller and faster, but it isn't
likely to do all the I/O in the same way Mush does. If it were me, and
(Heaven forbid) I were running an Intel machine, I'd probably use Mush
only for specialized things like Norton and use DR-DOS for everything
else, simply because DR-DOS is a /lot/ more sophisticated and generally
more powerful. (I'm accustomed to weird O/S compatibility problems; I
have about 6 or 7 different operating systems for the Model 4, not
counting CP/M and Z-System...) Of course, if I didn't care about Mush
compatibility at all, I'd probably run CP/M-86 on this hypothetical
Intel machine and forget the whole blessed thing.
                 --A Z Turtle