On Sat, 25 Dec 2021 at 21:21, tom ehlert <t...@drivesnapshot.de> wrote: > > while technically true, it couldn't just multitask ramdom DOS programs > as multi tasking systems like OS/2 or better always could.
Yes, it can. I have tested it with, for example, the MS-DOS Editor from Windows 98SE on one screen, WordPerfect 6.2 on another screen and MS Word 6 on a third screen. > programs would only multitask if specifically written to the DRDOS API > - which almost nobody did (for commercial avalable software). This is not true. > that is true. the (mostly) complete source code MSDOS 6.2 escaped into the > wild, > even if not widely available. You said, quote: > > it wasn't a sanctioned release from microsoft. Don't try to revise this now. Yes, there have been fully-sanctioned releases of MS-DOS from Microsoft. As I said: 1.25, and a set of source files containing a mix of 2.0 and 2.11 source code. Yes, there are *two* fully legal source code releases of MS-DOS from Microsoft itself. > MSDOS 2.11 might be interesting from a museum/historic prespective. > as an operating system it's completely obsolete and useless, and you will not > learn > much by studying the source code. This is true but an entirely different question which had not previously been discussed in this thread. Sure, yes, MS-DOS 2 is ancient and no real use now. However, you said that MS had not released DOS and that's wrong. You did not say "MS did not release the final version of DOS as FOSS", or "MS did not release a late enough version of MS-DOS to be useful." Those statements are true, but they aren't what you said. No, it's not really much use. Yes, it's only an archaeological curiosity. MS is not truly any friend or fan of FOSS and it only releases tiny useless dribs and drabs of FOSS code, such as DOS 1 and 2, Word for Windows 1.1, the Windows 3 File Manager and a few other trivial little things. That is because, IMHO, it's just a PR exercise. Today, the entire DOS and Windows 3/9x codebase is basically entirely obsolete and the company does not sell any products based on it. It *could* release everything prior to the Windows NT line with no substantial impact on any current product. However, this would cost it money. The code is probably a mess, and it contains material from third parties which would have to be removed. A large cleanup operation would be needed, which would take dozens of people maybe years of work, and MS stands to gain nothing from it. However, it would help FreeDOS, and WINE, and ReactOS, and several other FOSS projects, which MS management almost certainly does not want to do. So, given it would benefit others but not the company, *and* it would cost them serious money, I doubt it will happen. So if you had said that it hadn't released any _useful_ version of DOS, I'd agree. But you didn't say that. You said MS did not release DOS, and that is wrong. It's there and it's legit. > there's a LOT that happened between 2.11 (october 1983) and 6.22 (april 1994) 100% agree. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053 _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
