"Toy" OS as opposed to a "Real" OS

[TheDragon]

DOS may not have been well-designed, but it was very well marketed. It Microsoft on the map. It made Microsoft EAT the map. It was the first REAL OS, the one that started it all! I think a toy OS (one that was referred to in the beginning) is one that was designed for a tutorial. On that was just there to teach. And/or one that was never really taken seriously, like "hey, you guys, I got a new OS yesterday. Wanna come over and we'll see if we can bust it open before Mom gets home?." An OS that never gets respect, even by it's creator. One that is stuffed in the closet until you move out or your kids find it in like 25 years. A cheap-o OS.

[cr2]

It was the first REAL OS, the one that started it all!

It may have been a "real" OS, but it wasn't the first one.

1966: DOS/360
1969: UNIX
1976: CP/M
1977: BSD
1978: Apple DOS
1979: Atari DOS
1980: 86-DOS(QDOS) - predecessor to MS-DOS
1981: Finally, MS-DOS

[DeletedAccount]

Hi ,
DOS is actually quite well designed . It was pretty much well designed when compared to the crappy hardware available at the point of time it was released . DOS actually made it easier to port the older CP/M programs . Although DOS is not a modern operating system ,It was quite good for that point of time and hardware .

Regards
Sandeep

[bewing]

I'd say that the nice thing about DOS was that it forced the standardization and mass production of hardware, which was the main thing that enabled modern OSes to be designed for the PC in the first place. It was a necessary evolutionary step.