Talk:MS-DOS Editor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a WikiProject devoted to maintaining and improving the informative value and quality of Wikipedia's many Microsoft Windows articles.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on WikiProject Microsoft Windows's importance scale.

Is converting Unix newlines to DOS newlines good or bad. It's on both features and limitaions.76.193.33.193 21:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

It is good only when you need it. Otherwise, when it is done automatically, it will break some of your text files! It would have been good to offer the newline conversion as an option. I remember having lots of conversion problems because I used to transfer text files back and forth, betweem my UNIX account at the university and my home computer. The MS-DOS newline characters were considered as syntax errors by many compilers and interpreters in UNIX. 207.134.187.165 00:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cmd/run

edit works for running editor in both cmd and run Atomic1fire (talk) 02:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Windows NT

Does Windows NT use the same version of Edit as 95? The Vista version works without qbasic. Josh 04:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Windows NT to early 5.0 betas, and early chicago betas had Edit 1.0 (ie DOS 5 editor). Windows 9x distributed versions of Edit 1.1 (DOS 6 Editor), although this was via qbasic /EDCOM, or by using edit.com + edit.hlp from DOS 6. (edit.hlp has a different set of links to DOS 5). Windows 9x, and Windows 2000 and later, have Edit 2.00.26, although Windows ME and some later NT versions are compressed. All of these work quite happily under DOS.

Early chicago versions were labeled "Emergency Chicago Editor" in help/about.

--Wendy.krieger (talk) 11:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:MSDOS Edit.png

Image:MSDOS Edit.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)