[Freedos-user] Replace Windows 98SE with Linux....
Microsoft seems to think everyone can buy a new computer frequently,
but the QSP-2 uses an ISA shared memory card that is not compatible
with non ISA systems and Q-Soft 2 seems to require dos based Windows.
Since Microsoft has graciously decided that $100k+ machines which
depend on Windows 98SE don't matter, the ideal solution substitutes an
open source system. Can Q-Soft 2 run on any Linux system via Wine?
Can Linux still support the ISA bus and run on as little as a 2.4 Ghz
Pentium 4 SBC? Can Freedos replace the MS-DOS 6.22 system in this
machine?
The major problems you will run into is the proprietary ISA card.
Maybe Virtualbox could help here on a powerful enough SBC with a
PICMG-1.3 backplane that has ISA.
Even a substitute for Windows 98SE running on top of Freedos for the
gui would be a nice alternative. I know there is FLTK for a gui
environment on Freedos, but how do you implement the WIN32 API or does
wine work with FLTK and Freedos?
-- Michael C. Robinson
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Source code to Windows 9x and ME...
Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore? One would want to get the source code and then open source it of course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is closed source. Surely, Microsoft could release pre 9x Windows? It wouldn't hurt Microsoft at all since Windows is squarely NT based now where many modern systems won't even support DOS let alone DOS based Windows. I realize it would probably be very expensive to get Microsoft to cough up the source code, but has anyone even looked into this? ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Source code to Windows 9x and ME...
Quoting andrew fabbro : On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 6:36 AM Michael C Robinson < mich...@robinson-west.com> wrote: Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore? One would want to get the source code and then open source it of course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is closed source. Surely, Microsoft could release pre 9x Windows? It wouldn't hurt Microsoft at all since Windows is squarely NT based now where many modern systems won't even support DOS let alone DOS based Windows. I realize it would probably be very expensive to get Microsoft to cough up the source code, but has anyone even looked into this? "It wouldn't hurt Microsoft" is not exactly a true statement. Major reasons MSFT won't be releasing source code like that: (1) Some components are still in use. Microsoft does not rewrite their OS from scratch with each new version and while Windows 10 is very different than Windows Me, it's still an x86 OS. (2) There may be pieces they licensed or are under others' copyrights. Sorting that out is non-trivial. This is true especially of things like drivers. (3) Source code often reveals the inner workings of companies and products. It's not unusual to see things like "we put this in because our other product has a bug and we have to compensate" and comments like that. Not to mention profanity :-) (4) Many times old source code hides other embarrassing (or semi-embarrassing) secrets. There was a leak of Windows 2000 many years ago and I read that it had comments such as "(some app) breaks here so we put in this workaround to maintain compatibility with previous versions". This would inevitably lead to all kinds of press about favoring different vendors, etc. (5) And the big one...where's the money in releasing old source code? It takes lawyers, tech people, etc. and likely would cost a fair amount of money just to package it up. BTW, Microsoft has (or at least at one time had) various programs where universities had access to the source code, but that was under NDA. -- andrew fabbro and...@fabbro.org ReactOS won't replace Windows 9x/ME because it is not dos based. Originally the target was 9x, but they gave up on that :-( For stuff that isn't supported anymore but should be, surely all the players could come together and release source code. Frankly, I think it should be the law that you have to release source code if you stop supporting a popular OS. Aren't some of the licenses pushing 20 years now? ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Source code to Windows 9x and ME...
I don't have a few million, but a group able to cobble together a few million is more realistic to put together. Question is, how much would membership cost in a group whose goal is to GPL Windows 16 and 32 bit be? Say such a group came into existence and a million people joined for $20/month. The first target, Windows 16 bit land. Then, the 32 bit version of Windows including 9x and ME. Eventually, the group would be able to open source the MS-DOS based versions of Windows completely and membership fees could be reduced or even dropped. Maybe the source code isn't needed, maybe just the interfaces and the design are needed. Quoting Jon Brase : If you can cut a check for a few million, Microsoft might sell you the rights (to the components that they created themselves, of course, not anything they licensed from others), give you whatever source code they still have archived, and let you license it to the public as you choose. If you can't cut a check, but ask nicely, they have been open sourcing things that nobody ever thought they'd open source, so maybe they will eventually open-source Win9x. Frankly, though, I'd rather concentrate on getting them to just release all their old Win16 code (Win3, the Win16 components of Win9x, and NTVDM): that's the part of the PC ecosystem where vintage applications are in most danger of being lost because nobody has an environment to run them on anymore: DOS is fairly well covered by DOSBox, FreeDOS, etc, and Win32 is still an environment that Microsoft maintains, that people actively write applications for, and that the Wine project is putting a fair bit of effort into implementing well. Win16, on the other hand, is somewhat neglected by both MS and Wine, and it would be good if the old MS source code could be released, or, failing that, the binaries could at least be put under an open-source license that explicitly allowed reverse engineering. Original message ---- From: Michael C Robinson Date: 9/26/2019 08:35 (GMT-06:00) To: p...@lists.pdxlinux.org Cc: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Freedos-user] Source code to Windows 9x and ME... Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore? One would want to get the source code and then open source it of course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is closed source. Surely, Microsoft could release pre 9x Windows? It wouldn't hurt Microsoft at all since Windows is squarely NT based now where many modern systems won't even support DOS let alone DOS based Windows. I realize it would probably be very expensive to get Microsoft to cough up the source code, but has anyone even looked into this? ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Source code to Windows 9x and ME...
Quoting Ralf Quint : On 9/26/2019 6:35 AM, Michael C Robinson wrote: Is it possible to get the source code to Windows 9x and ME since Microsoft isn't supporting it anymore? No. One would want to get the source code and then open source it of course. Even Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11 is closed source. Surely, Microsoft could release pre 9x Windows? It wouldn't hurt Microsoft at all since Windows is squarely NT based now where many modern systems won't even support DOS let alone DOS based Windows. I realize it would probably be very expensive to get Microsoft to cough up the source code, but has anyone even looked into this? Sounds rather idealistic and void of any facts. Microsoft has not interest to open source ANY part of ANY windows. Even Windows 1.x and 2.x, which are on GitHub now, are still copyrighted. So it all comes down to "you can look but you can't touch", which as far as FreeDOS is concerned (for which any Windows source code be irrelevant to begin with) would be of no interest... Ralf Freedos should be capable of supporting Windows 3.1, at least in standard mode. Wouldn't it be great if freedos could support that better and 3.11 as well along with a lot of programs from that era? Maybe source code won't help, but the interfaces and other engineering information could be quite useful for someone trying to support programs designed for Windows 16 bit. That said, Win32 based programs are of interest to anyone who needs to run them in a dos based environment. There is a lot of industrial software that depends on a combination of MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 98 SE. You say who cares, but let's look at this a little closer for a moment. One of freedos's selling points is running old dos based systems. If you can run these systems on an open source supported OS, that is better than running on MS-DOS from an a bandonware site. There is also the potential that freedos can run this old software on newer hardware that isn't 20+ years old. The biggest problem with 98se/ME is that there aren't drivers for hardware that is newer than the Pentium II pretty much. Windows ME is pretty much the same story. Getting an industrial PII on a single board for a PICMG 1.3 backplane or an ISA backplane, that is probably the best bet for the pick and place machine we want to get up and running. The machine is worth $20k-$30k. Yes we could pull the two heads and try a set of heads based on Windows 7, but that is nearing EOL already. Worse than that, the cost of Windows 7 heads is nearly half of what the machine is worth. I'd say that my brother's machine is worth at least $15k right now. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Source code to Windows 9x and ME...
The comment that a pick and place machine designed around MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 9x/ME is a funny machine is a little disingenuous. Freedos didn't exist in a useable form back then and Windows 9x/ME in it's day was dominant. I'm hopeful that we could use freedos on the real time system, we can at least try. Trouble may crop up with respect to the shared memory card which is ISA based. Depends on what interfaces in MS-DOS 6.22 are important and which ones aren't. The advantage if Freedos works is that it is supported currently. Potentially, usb support and fat32 support could come in handy. Does Microsoft Scandisk for Windows 98se work on freedos? We could use more modern SBC's with Freedos potentially than what we can use with MS-DOS. Software doesn't rot, but hardware does. I'm hopeful too that we can use at least Windows 2000 on the gui. There is no direct replacement for Windows 98/ME. These systems are very resource hungry and only moderately stable. If we can get away with Windows 2000, we may be able to replace that in the future with a stable ReactOS. At that point, we are open source and supported across both heads. -- Michael C. Robinson ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Bolitare black screen on exit...
Note that I am running it in VirtualBox on an AMD FX 8350 processor with 8 cores. Might have something to do with CentOS 7 x86_64 as the host system. Maybe I'm giving freedos too much ram? Can anyone else reproduce the Bolitare black screens on exit issue? -- Michael Robinson ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] IDE vs. SATA
Freedos in general is an IDE only system, but why not support SATA I/II/III? No MS-DOS, DR-DOS, etcetera don't support SATA, but why not support it anyways? What are the implications of adding SATA support to the kernel or through a TSR? The obvious workaround is to get a SATA to PATA converter. That's kinda kludgy though. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] What about scsi???
I have a 4G scsi hard drive connect to an LSI Logic low profile scsi card. I'm trying to install freedos 1.1 from a floppy disk. Are there scsi drivers I can add to the disk? -- LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] What about scsi???
The scsi card appears to be 53C1010-66 LsiLogic where I have a Compaq 4.3 gig scsi drive connected to it. The scsi drive has no partitions on it, but I successfully low level formatted it. I searched via google and tried a copy of symdisk.sys and aspi8xx.sys, but the hard drive doesn't detect. I noticed that the card doesn't seem to the detect the hard drive if it is scanning from 0 to 15, but it works when scanning from 15 to 0. I wish scsi kernels were standardized and open sourced for freedos. The current kernel expects IDE or SATA. The hard drive is small, so using freedos is going to be ideal and I still need to test the hard disk. The controller is an ultra 3 scsi controller. I doubt that the hard disk can do that though. I could try an old version of Linux, but I'd have to install via network and/or floppy disk. -- LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Windows 98SE and ipxwrapper...
Quoting TJ Edmister : > On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:32:18 -0500, Michael Robinson > wrote: > >> Windows 98 sort of running on top of a DOS system doesn't work with >> ipxwrapper-0.4.0. There is an error that iplphapi.dll can't be found >> or something similar. > > Why do you need an ipx wrapper on win98? You can install the IPX protocol > natively under the network control panel and DOS programs running within > Windows will be able to use it. Well, if I use IPX wrapper I'm no longer using standard IPX networking, I am tunneling via UDP. The Windows 98 client understandably can't find an IPX network because strictly speaking there isn't one. This is why you have to use IPX wrapper under Windows XP even though XP has native IPX support. There is really only a problem when Windows 7 is introduced. A better workaround would be an open source IPX/SPX implementation that works on all versions of Windows up to 8. -- LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] PXE boot freedos...
I know how to boot freedos via etherboot. How do I load freedos via pxelinux? -- Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] [Fwd: Re: cd burning?]
Well Karen, I don't know much about screen readers and DOS let alone screen readers and Linux or screen readers and Windows. I feel after reading your response, especially the laugh out loud part, that you were rude and not in line with the spirit of don't turn this mailing list into what is seen on usenet. There is no commercially supported version of DOS that I know of. DOS as an OS cannot implement user based restrictions. DOS is simple, but there is a lack of drivers for a lot of the hardware that exists today where something as specific and rare as a screen reader... well I suspect there aren't very many DOS based screen readers. For those working on Freedos 1.1, please consider improving support for Windows 3.x in the short run and in the long run offer a free alternative that provides multitasking. Another thing, I should be able to modify the ISO for Freedos to incorporate post Freedos 1.1 updates as I have a feeling that updates will be coming out between the 1.1 and 2.0 release. At some point, those of us who have the processing power may want to run Firefox on top of Freedos. A multitasking GUI that the Firefox developers are willing to port Firefox to is needed. I want the focus to stay on DOS though for now. I hope Freedos 1.1 comes out soon ;-) -- Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Eric Auer's "A Fantasy of a future..."
DOS is not a good candidate for multitasking. Why DOS can run in less memory and with older hardware than NT style systems and Linux style systems can, others who are more knowledgeable can comment on that. Remember, QDOS was probably the first DOS where the acronym means, quick and dirty operating system. DOS style systems do not have a layer of abstraction between hardware and programs, thus compatibility is difficult to maintain. I suppose DOS is faster than a typical modern OS because of the reduction of layers between apps and hardware, but this comes at a price. I am not impressed with Freedos network support or printer support for that matter. If someone could port CUPS to Freedos, that would be really nice. As far as networking, someone should make a GPL clone of Microsoft Client and possibly others should start making DOS drivers for modern network cards and release those under a GPL license. Linux has Freedos beat hands down for hardware support including sound card support, but I suppose porting Linux drivers to Freedos could be very difficult because Freedos doesn't protect the hardware the way Linux does and because application programs typically try to run the hardware directly. In the same sense that DOS is not a system that one wants to multitask on, DOS is also not a system that one wants to support multiple users on because there is zero as in no file protection. DOS systems do not support the concept of this file belongs to this user and that file belongs to that user and so on. Dosbox is a nice way to go, but Linux probably isn't the fastest host system in the world. Perhaps Freedos 32 needs to be revived and a gui developed for it that can run Dosbox. I think the future for Freedos is seeing how much hardware power you really need to emulate the typical PC of days gone by. Is a first generation Pentium that is too slow now for Linux fast enough to emulate the typical IBM PC and run Freedos? I say virtualization and emulation are the future because it may be difficult or impossible to drive modern hardware that DOS applications were not written for in Freedos running natively. An emulator can translate calls for an old sound blaster style card to drive a newer Intel integrated sound system. Otherwise, I encourage people to check out games like Dirk Dashing Secret Agent to get a taste of what can be done natively on a Linux system. Why do modern operating systems abstract the hardware away? Security, maintainability, and easing the task of application programmers comes to mind. A badly written program in control of the hardware is bad news. If the hardware is protected though, processes that are out of control can potentially be contained and controlled. I think a discussion of why Microsoft abandoned DOS for NT is in order before people go crazy about enhancing Freedos. DOS was never intended to support multiple users and multiple processes let alone contain badly written software. For those who like simplicity and want something graphical, check out Syllable and help if you can. At a certain point, one has to limit their expectations for Freedos or else the system will disappoint. The point of Freedos is to be able to use very old computers and run old software that predates Windows NT and Linux. I would like to see a simple gui developed for Freedos that can run Firefox, but even that is probably getting too far away from what DOS and Freedos in particular are for. A true DOS system has zero intelligence about the software being run. Viruses etcetera are a serious problem in a DOS environment. Emulating DOS with an emulator that catches bad code before that code has a chance to execute is probably a doable thing. I want to see a new release of Freedos with fewer bugs as much as the next guy, but before that can happen I think a few things have to be considered: 1) Interest in freedos will drop even further if a new release doesn't run on 386 and older computers. 2) Freedos is not a multitasking OS or a true networking OS where trying to make it one while ignoring other OSes that fit that description better is going to be unpopular. The single task nature of Freedos can be a strength. 3) Freedos needs to become Windows 9x compatible at some point or else a different gui running on top of Freedos needs to be popularized. This Windows 9x replacement needs to run on hardware as old as the late model 486. This gui needs to make more network cards and printers work on top of Freedos than would typically work in a program called from the command prompt. 4) As we get further and further away from the "good old days" where everyone ran a commercial version of DOS, open source DOS software is going to become more important and be legal to use. Popular closed source software, even Wordperfect for Dos, won't be legal to use. Closed source software with bugs, even simcity for DOS has bugs, isn't really fixable. Simcity is a bad example because Micropolis
Re: [Freedos-user] Eric Auer's "A Fantasy of a future..."
ReactOS is neither a stable nor potentially even a promising project anymore depending on who you talk to. Sadly, I got kicked off of the forum boards and the IRC channel. I haven't been back since. I don't like when people say, "ReactOS is cloning Windows under the GPL and this work doesn't need to be done," because the job isn't getting done. ReactOS could stay in alpha easily for another 10+ years because there are not enough developers and possibly the developers that are working on ReactOS don't have all of the needed skill sets let enough enough time to dedicate to the project. ReactOS isn't going to be a Windows replacement that runs on top of Freedos. Suggesting that ReactOS run on top of Freedos on any of the ReactOS forums or the ReactOS IRC channel will bring down a lot of criticism upon you and most likely more than you can handle. ReactOS quite honestly is seemingly being pushed by rabid anti theists and there is a strong mob mentality on issues of how to do things. The GCC verses MSVC debate comes to mind. I went by nute on the ReactOS forums. Look and you can see how dicey things got. There is the Linux Unified Kernel project, but how well that will allow people to run Windows programs on a Linux system directly is yet to be seen. I bet that LUK has a better chance of working than ReactOS quite honestly. Steer clear of the reactos irc channel, there is no moderating and there is a horrific and horrendous mob mentality. I would like a direct replacement for Windows 98SE which supports a lot of games and other software that is now orphanware. There is hardware for Windows 9x that doesn't work on NT based versions of Windows. I realize that this is not a Freedos 1.1 thing or potentially even a Freedos 3.0 thing. An alternative is to revive Freedos 32 and develop a simple GUI for it that will attract open source programmers. -- Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Eric Auer's "A Fantasy of a future..."
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 11:53 +0100, Liam Proven wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Michael C. Robinson > wrote: > > ReactOS is neither a stable nor potentially even a promising project > > anymore depending on who you talk to. Sadly, I got kicked off of the > > forum boards and the IRC channel. I haven't been back since. > > > > I don't like when people say, "ReactOS is cloning Windows under the > > GPL and this work doesn't need to be done," because the job > > isn't getting done. ReactOS could stay in alpha easily for another > > 10+ years because there are not enough developers and possibly the > > developers that are working on ReactOS don't have all of the needed > > skill sets let enough enough time to dedicate to the project. > > They have got a very long way and it's a tremendously impressive > project. You do them a grave disservice by criticising & bad-mouthing > them thus. Where did I bad mouth anyone in my statements? I simply stated that ReactOS could remain an alpha OS for 10+ years easily. ReactOS might stay in alpha state forever. As far as putting up what people said on the reactos channel being bad mouthing, that would only be true if I had modified the transcript on my web site. > I also think it's a pointless, futile & unproductive effort and a > colossal waste of work by a lot of smart, dedicated people. Not a lot of people obviously, futile perhaps, smart is hard to verify remotely, dedicated is debatable. > > ReactOS isn't going to be a Windows replacement that runs on top of > > Freedos. > > No, and a very good job to. > > Suggesting that ReactOS run on top of Freedos on > > any of the ReactOS forums or the ReactOS IRC channel will bring down > > a lot of criticism upon you and most likely more than you can handle. > > And they are absolutely right to do so. It is a ridiculous idea. I suppose Freedos to you is a ridiculous idea also. Perhaps you think that Windows 9x in general and Windows 3.x, the predecessor, were also bad ideas. > > ReactOS quite honestly is seemingly being pushed by rabid anti theists > > What the...? What have their religious beliefs got to do with anything? Enough to pressure me to say what it is I believe, announce "you have been figured out," and kick me off of the ReactOS channel shortly after. Liam, announcing you are an anti theist suggests that you want attention and are insecure. Why should I or anyone else give you any attention? > As it happens, I am an evangelistic anti-theist myself, but this is > utterly irrelevant to any technical discussion whatsoever. > > > and there is a strong mob mentality on issues of how to do things. > > Well, there are a whole bunch of people doing stuff and 10x as many > who contribute nothing but want to tell them how to proceed. I can > understand how & why they'd get annoyed. > > > The > > GCC verses MSVC debate comes to mind. > > Well, I reckon they should be using GCC myself, but then, the whole > project is instant toast if MS ever notices it anyway. > > > I went by nute on the ReactOS forums. Look and you can see how dicey > > things got. > > Ahhh, I remember reading some of that. *You* were that trouble-maker, > were you? [Laughs] > > > There is the Linux Unified Kernel project, but how well that will allow > > people to run Windows programs on a Linux system directly is yet to be > > seen. I bet that LUK has a better chance of working than ReactOS quite > > honestly. > > It has a snowball's chance in a supernova. You are showing unsubstantiated bias and prejudice. > > Steer clear of the reactos irc channel, there is no moderating and there > > is a horrific and horrendous mob mentality. > > > > I would like a direct replacement for Windows 98SE which supports a lot > > of games and other software that is now orphanware. > > Absurd. You apparently have no conception of the amount of work & code > involved, and why on earth would a whole team of volunteers spend > years cloning a large, complex, obsolete & dead OS that was already > technically irrelevant a decade ago? There is a lot of of orphaned software that was never designed for NT. Windows 9x didn't require as much computing power as NT systems do now when it was popular. Win32 existed in the Windows 9x days where most of or all of the work done on WINE could probably be leveraged. A replacement for Windows 9x would be valuable because legally using Windows 9x is a real challenge these days. > I'm suggesting cloning something that was 200KB in size which came > from a dead company who no longer even have the so
Re: [Freedos-user] Project Coordinator's Request
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 08:59 -0400, Pat Villani wrote: > Please drop the "A Fantasy of a future..." thread. It has degenerated > and gone on long enough. > > Pat Villani > FreeDOS Project Coordinator Pat, honestly, do you blame me for this thread going the way it did? Do I have some incredible power to inspire rudeness in others? I'd honestly like to know why you deal with this this way and don't go after the personal attacks let alone the I am an atheist and it is going to tick you off grabs for attention. There is a real injustice here. I didn't ask for this thread to turn into a defend ReactOS or support efforts to improve Windows compatibility in Freedos. ReactOS is a troubled project in my opinion, without saying anything negative about any of the ReactOS developers. I am saddened, sad that I can't suggest effort be undertaken to improve Windows compatibility in Freedos at some point in the future without getting attacked or called insane. -- Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Freedos hard drive detection...
I have a zip 250 atapi drive where I am wondering why Battletech 2 the Crescent Hawk's Revenge knows that this isn't a harddrive? Does anyone know a simple way around this issue? -- ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos hard drive detection...
Battletech 2 knows that a ramdisk isn't a hard disk and refuses to work from one. On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 13:25 +0800, Johnson Lam wrote: > Hi, > > I suggest you code a simple batch to copy the game to a RAMdisk, after > quit copy the save game back to ZIP. > > Play it on the ZIP is slow and wear out the disk. > > Sent from Johnson's iPhone > > On 21 Jun 2010, at 12:54 PM, "Michael C. Robinson" > wrote: > > > I have a zip 250 atapi drive where I am wondering why Battletech 2 the > > Crescent Hawk's Revenge knows that this isn't a harddrive? Does > > anyone > > know a simple way around this issue? > > -- ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] SCSI cdrom drives...
Is there a dos driver for a standard 4x scsi cdrom reader connected to an Adaptec 2940U2W? -- Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Basic networking abilities
On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 04:12 +0200, japhethx gmail wrote: > > [snip] I think > > everybody has learned the last years that GPL software can be used > > without any second thoughts and distributed freely.[snip] > > No. Yes, that's a huge strong point. As long as you provide access to the complete source code, for a fee to cover copying/transmission or gratis is irrelevant. > > I am also a real fan of the Free Software idea. Otherwise I wouldn't > > use FreeDOS (which is released under the GPL as well). Some developers > > may not be too happy about the license choice, especially those who > > would like to grab your code and try to make money from it by making > > it part of an unfree software. But who cares about them? I think the > > GPL is about having fun, about trust and fairness and about learning > > from others and alllowing others to participate. > > Thanks for your enthusiasm and propaganda! > > GPL is a valid license that has its pros and cons. Personally, I don't like > it. One reason for this is because it sounds like a political manifesto, > which > - IMO - insults the readers intelligence. > > Just my opinion :)). Is there a software license open source or not that DOESN'T limit you in some way? Can a software license not be political? What's really driving this anti-GPL commentary? Sure, you can't hide changes that you make to open source software under the GPL. Why does the GPL exist? Simple, Microsoft is an unchallenged monopoly. The only serious alternative that exists to Windows is open source software. No closed source commercial endeavor can get off the ground. If you like Windows, there is ReactOS. This is a GPL based project that has a ways to go, but I suppose it is somewhat interesting. The GPL is not always convenient, but would you pay for Freedos 1.1 say $100+ if it wasn't free? The answer is clearly no. Freedos will always be free, give or take a sharing fee. GPL software can be fixed even if the original author dies or loses interest in it. With closed source software, this isn't the case at all. With most software these days being old software that needs to be maintained, open source often makes more sense than closed source. Back to networking, DOS by it's very nature is one of the simplest OS'es in existence. DOS hides very little from user space. Security is an afterthought. Networking and security go hand in hand. If one tries to impose a networking standard on DOS or worse one expects to make DOS thread and multi core safe, the product will not be DOS. Freedos has no way of running up to date web browsers. Adding them to freedos, there is a risk that the minimum computer needed will become a Pentium 4 or better. File level security can't be implemented in a DOS environment without breaking old software that isn't aware of the security. I don't know if thread programming is even possible in DOS. I suppose one could develop a hypervisor for multi core systems that implements an independent copy of DOS on each processor core. I understand that there was at one time a multi user version of DOS, but compatibility is going to be an issue trying to implement one. -- Simplify data backup and recovery for your virtual environment with vRanger. Installation's a snap, and flexible recovery options mean your data is safe, secure and there when you need it. Data protection magic? Nope - It's vRanger. Get your free trial download today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-sfdev2dev ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] IMPORTANT "Off Topic" -- U.S. Medical Costs!!
On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 01:12 +0200, Bernd Blaauw wrote: > Op 3-8-2011 0:51, Jack schreef: > > > > Re: my 25-Jun-2011 gall-bladder removal, the hospital has > > finally sent a $960 bill for my "co-pay" (amount not paid > > by my medical insurance company). I sent a check today. > > you missed a 'good' opportunity to visit Europe :) > > Youtube lists some documentaries, guess Michael Moore's "SICKO" movie as > well. No comments on that movie hehe, would form a 100-responses thread. > > All in all healthcare here in Europe is pretty decent and affordable, > despite waiting lists for some stuff and costs/contributions rising > quite fast. Yay privatizing things and insurance companies becoming a > man-in-the-middle. Assuming the doctors don't misdiagnose you or use antiquated medical techniques and technology, Europe is great. This is a good time to point out that Obama who supposedly fixed medicine in the USA hasn't fixed anything. Here's a thought, break up the pharmaceuticals so there is more competition and lower prices for medicine. Another thought, give the health care dollars to the states and make the states responsible for administering them. For one thing, many of us don't want: suicide, birth control, or abortion coverage. Yeah, suicide coverage is where national health care is heading. Never mind the morality of doctors killing their patients, suicide is cheaper. -- BlackBerry® DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA The must-attend event for mobile developers. Connect with experts. Get tools for creating Super Apps. See the latest technologies. Sessions, hands-on labs, demos & much more. Register early & save! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-blackberry-1 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Will Freedos support more modern hardware?
I'm thinking of modern video cards and multiple core processors. I would imagine that Freedos in 16 bit mode can't use multiple cores. One of the problems with DOS that I recall is a total lack of hardware protection. This allowed direct hardware access, which is fast. Unfortunately, accessing hardware directly instead of through a well defined interface makes supporting that software a nightmare. Is producing a 32 bit protected mode Freedos or even a 64 bit version of Freedos dead? I'm thinking that Freedos should be able to support multiple processing cores and other modern hardware. OpenGem should be upgraded to work on 32 or 64 bit systems. Another consideration, a 32 bit or 64 bit variant of Freedos should protect the hardware. An open networking standard should exist in a 32 or 64 bit version of Freedos supporting most of the popular network cards. A 32 or 64 bit Freedos that can simulate a 16 bit DOS environment where there is standard well supported virtual hardware is a thought. Think virtual printers for WordPerfect 6.0 that the standard install disks provide drivers for. On the subject of word processing, it would be nice if Freedos could run a WordPerfect equivalent program that is licensed under the GPL. I'm thinking the goal for protected mode Freedos that is 32 or 64 bit should be providing a hypervisor to run multiple instances of 16 bit Freedos or even Linux instances. I think 32/64 bit Freedos should be the minimum that is needed to provide hardware protection, memory management, etcetera. After all, DOS systems are supposed to be simple, light, and really fast. Why Freedos? What are the defining reasons and goals for the coming 1.1 release? Except for certain smart phones and other embedded computers, does Freedos really have a niche anymore? Syllable is it's own operating system, but could a 32 bit version of Freedos or even a 64 bit version of Freedos run it under emulation? OpenGL support would be nice, but a 32 bit GUI is needed for that. -- Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Will Freedos support more modern hardware?
> Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm afraid, that the system, which is supposed to > be "simple, light and really fast", just cannot have any "protection > layers" - and _should_ allow direct access to hardware (unlike all > those Unix-variants). The 386 on up supports protection in hardware to a certain degree. DOS has never been defined on modern 64 bit computers to my knowledge. Of course, I suppose one could have protection be an optional thing. ReactOS is possibly a decade out from being stable. I probably can't even compile an installable ISO right now. It isn't entirely clear why, but the ReactOS project is hitting some major show stoppers. Not to bad mouth the project, but ReactOS may not reach Beta for a few years and the 1.0 release could be a decade off. We are heading towards years end here and still no 0.4.x release of ReactOS. Freedos seems to be advancing faster at the moment. I hope I'm wrong about ReactOS and I do recognize people's thinking that if you want Windows you want ReactOS. An advanced Opengem that can run a modern web browser which has drivers for modern network chipsets and printers really might be nice where making opengem 32 bit with drivers for modern hardware should be easier than say cloning Windows 3.11 for workgroups. -- Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Will Freedos support more modern hardware?
A thought experiment, could a 32 bit version of Freedos with a version of Opengem that can support modern hardawre run on one processor core while dos command lines that are actually full blown dos run on the other processor cores? Segment the memory so that each core, say 1 gig per core on a quad core, will not interfere with the other cores. What keeps Opengem from supporting say a modern laser or photo printer? What apps does Opengem support? I don't think Windows 3.1 or a Windows 3.1 clone is necessary and I know that it would be extremely hard to get there. It would be nice if viewing JPEG images, photos, was possible in Opengem. There used to be an app in Slackware that lets you view JPEG images from the command line called seejpeg. There apparently used to be a version of DOS called concurrent dos that actually attempted or was capable of multitasking. Multitasking in the multiple core era should be more interesting where Linux is a great system, but it might be possible to squeeze more performance out. Figuring out what to use multiple cores for is a problem in today's world. What do you with seven cores? How about 100 cores? Multicore chips are not coming into existence because making faster single core chips doesn't make sense, they are coming into existence because making faster single core chips is impossible. -- Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Direct hardware access and the future...
Direct hardware access is practically speaking the fastest way to go, but it is not the most maintainable approach. The problem with using say WordPerfect or MS Word or Visicalc even, hardware is changing. The printers of the MS-DOS era have largely been replaced by networked printers and USB printers. How can one hope to directly support the new hardware in DOS when companies tightly control access to their hardware blue prints? Yes you can hack hardware to figure out how it works or study it somehow, but studying integrated circuits can be expensive and difficult. The return on investment, questionable. A 32/64 bit version of DOS isn't something that is well defined yet. As such, abstracting hardware details away might be possible. Imagine, a TSR for modern printers that abstracts the details away which WordPerfect, MS Word, Visicalc can send print jobs to using a well defined interface. Would this TSR be comparably fast to printer drivers for every modern printer written in assembly language? No. The point is, speed is not always the most important consideration even in a DOS environment. An input bound program is only as fast as the user at the keyboard. Dos means disk operating system which comes from QDOS which meant, quick and dirty operating system. A 32/64 bit version of Freedos is a project aiming to: access more memory, use larger hard disks, create larger files, use post DOS era hardware, and perhaps even use multiple cores. If there is a way to use say Windows or Linux print drivers in Freedos, why reinvent the wheel? Freedos does not protect the hardware and hardware is typically not abstracted away. Does this mean that all freedos drivers have to access the hardware directly? Could one make a modern sound card look like say a Sound Blaster 64 card via a driver that translates for the different hardware? If hardware drivers are embedded in DOS programs, does one have to hack those programs when new hardware comes out? Does Freedos make any sense on a multi core system with a terabyte or larger hard disk and gigabytes of ram? Many folks want to: word process, organize and play audio files, look at pictures, etcetera in Freedos. Others want to do real time work where direct hardware access and writing the code to control critical hardware in assembly language is mandatory. Graphical user interfaces are not a very DOS thing, but maximum performance is not always the overriding consideration. Maybe it is time to limit the scope of Freedos, that seems to be what people are doing already. I'm hearing, don't make Freedos a modern operating system. I'm hearing, no hardware protection even in Freedos 32 even if this is optional. One thing I dislike about DOS environments, typically if the program doesn't work because the hardware is not what it expected, there is nothing you can do. Unless you can recompile or patch the binary for the new hardware, you are toast. This was one of the major reasons for UNIX. Modern OS'es separate drivers from application programs instead of throwing them in the pot together. -- uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] desktop2 in freedos
On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 11:11 +, andrea...@interfree.it wrote: > Hi at all > is there anyone who did develop the desktop2 program (by F. Ritter?) > I use it by many years in dos & freedos. I think it's a true dos/gui, > easy suitable in freedos -save little defect- with power to > associate program/file, cute/paste/copy, & make tmp batch programs > etc.. > I'd probe Gem, GVFM, seal and ozone but I think Desktop2 is still > the most stable dos/gui. > > regards > andrea The most stable GUI depends on what you need. If you are wanting to run Windows applications, 16 bit ones that is, you are somewhat out of luck. I have installed Windows 3.1 on Freedos, but it is not free and there are certainly some issues. An option, if you want a really powerful GUI, is to use Syllable instead of Freedos. Syllable works on older computers that Linux does not work very well on. I've tried to stir some interest in putting out an advanced OpenGEM, but with no luck. I'd like to see OpenGEM outfitted with an optional word processor that rivals WordPerfect 6.0a supporting modern printers including photo printers. Once you get into photos and movies though, you might as well use: Linux, MacOS X, or even, yuck, Windows 7. The beauty of Freedos is that it supports a library of older software. The problem is, Freedos's underlying design is inadequate for modern software that is using multiple cores/processors and supporting multiple users simultaneously. Freedos, the underlying OS it is based on, predates hardware protection/abstraction being a practical idea. MS DOS was popular when the computer was used by one person at a time where access to data was equal for all users. Depending on what you need an OS to do determines what the GUI's underpinnings need to be capable of. All OS'es, even ones without character interfaces, determine what GUI's running on top of them can do practically speaking. If you feel you need Firefox or Chrome to browse the Web, then Freedos is not adequate. If you want to do basic word processing with nothing more advanced than what WordPerfect 6.0a can do, than Freedos is probably fine. The problem for Freedos, it is trying to be compatible with a closed source OS that was put together rapidly. Freedos does reasonably well, but there are definitely some corner cases that it cannot handle. Try playing Ultima 7 in Freedos. A 32/64 bit version of Freedos, something that goes beyond what Microsoft defined, has to be compatible with the current Freedos because of the project's current mandate. If an advanced Freedos supports every DOS program out there that ran in MS-DOS, that will be quite an accomplishment. Even if Freedos achieves complete compatibility with MS-DOS and is arguably better than MS-DOS, certain inherent limitations limit what Freedos can become. User separation and strong hardware abstraction are simply not possible. Another area of trouble for Freedos is this, is there enough freely available software for DOS environments? Is it even possible to buy commercial DOS software any more at reasonable prices? Are the best DOS programs ones that you will have to pirate? When MS-DOS support evaporated, companies didn't simply open up all their programs. Corel or whoever owned WordPerfect at the time didn't come out and say, you can distribute the DOS version as many times as you want now. The closest to free software you could get for the most part in the DOS world was shareware. Even today, even for Linux environments, there are software houses writing proprietary software that have no intention of ever releasing their software even in binary only form. Freedos at best will become more MS-DOS compatible and programs like Free Defrag will work better. I'd like to see projects started to fill in the gaps in available free software. If you have Linux, there is Libre Office. Trouble is, Linux doesn't run on a lot of older computers. I'm talking pre 386. Anymore, you need a Pentium or better (more like a multi core computer) to use a modern Linux distribution. As far as real time computing, something DOS is popular for, there is real time Linux. Linux can be pared down to fit in a tighter space and work within other constraints. Freedos's strongest reason to exist is that there is DOS software that people still want/need to use. Freedos is a niche operating system. An argument can be made that you shouldn't need a Linux/Windows/or Mac OSX system to do simple word processing and perform certain other offline tasks. Alternative OS'es to Freedos: menuetOS Syllable Visopsys ReactOS (WARNING: development is slow. Talking about that prohibited) Linux (various flavors) Windows 7 (yuck, Microsoft monopoly) -- EMC VNX: the world's simplest storage, starting under $10K The only unified storage solution that offers unified management Up to 160% more powerful than alternatives and 25%
Re: [Freedos-user] desktop2 in freedos
> > menuetOS Syllable Visopsys ReactOS Linux Windows7 > > Can you mention some pros and cons, in particular of the lesser > known first 3 items on the list? I can say about the last three > that: ReactOS tries to clone WinNT/XP, Linux has a lot of free > open software and Windows7 tries to be cool where Vista was not. > I think all OSes in this list have a more or less fancy GUI :-) > Not sure about hardware (RAM, disk, CPU?) requirements, though. Okay, menuetOS was mentioned by someone else and I've heard of it, but I don't know much about it. Syllable, check out http://www.syllable.org, is being designed for ordinary people instead of geeks and it is completely free. A new release has come out recently. Apparently, a Pentium is good enough to run Syllable. I think Syllable in the long run might make more sense than ReactOS as Syllable shouldn't inherit any Windows NT problems. Syllable supports OpenGL applications, so there is some software support already. Syllable comes with it's own web browser, Webster, that is being actively developed. The major advantage of Syllable is the design, it is intended to NOT overwhelm ordinary people. The major con of Syllable is that there are few developers and it clearly isn't finished yet. I couldn't get 0.6.4 to install directly on my Pentium 4. Visopsys, see http://www.visopsys.org, is the open source project of one man. I think the major strength of Visopsys is disk management. Visopsys aims to be compatible with other operating systems without being a clone of any of them. Major con, development has only been going on since 1997 and since there is one developer, one could argue that development is slow. I couldn't get 0.7 to install on my Pentium 4 last time I tried. Maybe there is no parallel ata support? ReactOS is in alpha stage and neither feature complete nor stable. The goal of ReactOS is that you replace Windows 7 with it and this is barely noticed. ReactOS aims to have the same interface as Windows and run the same software. Major con is the developer community, it is small and there are a number of very strong egos there. If you get chewed out on ReactOS IRC or flamed on the discussion boards, don't expect any corrective action in your favor. The IRC chat room really isn't moderated fairly, so don't be surprised if you are attacked personally and end up being the person kicked out. The current ReactOS developers have some major personal issues that are hurting the project public relations wise. I wish the current crop of developers would quit and get replaced by other, more emotionally stable people. Criticism is not handled well in the ReactOS community, so don't go there. There are a few programs that already work in ReactOS when you can get it running, but nothing current. I used to be nute on the forum boards, look for nute and zimbra and you'll know what I'm talking about as far as the community being problematic. Linux, various flavors, is the premier free operating system. Add wine to Linux and gain access to a fair number of Windows applications. Linux has been slowly gaining on the Desktop. There are many user groups to help you use Linux effectively. The application list is growing. Linux, unlike Syllable, Visopsys, MenuetOS, and ReactOS is stable and mature. Linux, unfortunately, is not light weight requiring almost as much processing power as Windows 7 depending on what you are doing with it. Linux is what you install if you have a Pentium 4 or better, Pentium 3 is possible for a server. There is a bit of a mess right now with gnome 3.0. The Linux 3.0 kernel is coming out, so there will probably be a minor amount of difficulty while vendors catch up. Of all the open source projects, Linux is probably the most successful. Linux is actually just a kernel, GNU/Linux is an operating system of which there are various flavors. There are probably over 300 different Linux distributions today. Which is the major problem, Linux standards base attempts to address the so many versions problem, but it is a voluntary effort. Linux is seen by many as a synonym for "it works." -- EMC VNX: the world's simplest storage, starting under $10K The only unified storage solution that offers unified management Up to 160% more powerful than alternatives and 25% more efficient. Guaranteed. http://p.sf.net/sfu/emc-vnx-dev2dev ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] [OT] Problems in the ReactOS community...
Windows, especially NT based Windows, is beyond the scope of Freedos.
Unfortunately, there have been suggestions to look at the ReactOS
project. I think this transcript which needs to get out despite the
rules details why the ReactOS project is a disaster that needs to be
cleaned up. Anyone can work on an OSS project. Keyword here is anyone.
Please, someone go ahead and get the code, form another community, and
continue development if this project is still
worthwhile.
Supposedly, Linux+WINE is not a better way to go, but the way things are
going in the ReactOS community, I'd have to say that it is a better way
to go.
Is there a way I can complain about the reactos.org site and get them
sanctioned? Taking the site down would be a good way to adjust
attitudes in that community.
Here is a transcript showing how bad ReactOS IRC has gotten:
None of your business.
_what_the_xuck_i_couldn't_get_my_own_one_at_once
it says it right there
* Alex_I hides his whois :)
ok im gonna play some halo
* Alex_I has quit (Read error: Protocol not available)
* Alex_I (~quas...@m83-188-161-194.cust.tele2.lt) has joined #reactos
* Brayshakes (~braysh...@c-76-103-196-188.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has
joined #reactos
Python interface unloaded
* Now talking on #reactos
* Topic for #reactos is: Official ReactOS Channel |
http://www.reactos.org | Use paste service:
http://www.reactos.org/paste/ | Testman URL: http://reactos.org/testman
| 0.3.12 is out!
* Topic for #reactos set by dangerground!
~dangergro@reactos/developer/dangerground at Mon Nov 15 05:01:09 2010
-ChanServ- [#reactos] Welcome to #ReactOS! || ***Please Identify your
Nickname! Ask for help if you don't know what this is!*** || Project
Information: http://www.reactos.org/?page=about || Developer Chat:
#reactos-dev || Enjoy your stay!
* #reactos :http://www.reactos.org
oh noes
opcode is still in his "INT 3","NOP" loop of death
Python interface unloaded
* Loaded log from Tue Dec 21 01:48:46 2010
* Now talking on #reactos
* Topic for #reactos is: Official ReactOS Channel |
http://www.reactos.org | 0.3.13 has been released! | Use paste service:
http://www.reactos.org/paste/ | Testman URL: http://reactos.org/testman
| lwIP has been integrated! || please test iso from themes branch:
http://www.mediafire.com/?u714qliwjswmte2
* Topic for #reactos set by Usurp!~syl@reactos/developer/Usurp at Sun
Aug 21 13:43:27 2011
-ChanServ- [#reactos] Welcome to #ReactOS! || ***Please Identify your
Nickname! Ask for help if you don't know what this is!*** || Project
Information: http://www.reactos.org/?page=about || Developer Chat:
#reactos-dev || Enjoy your stay!
* #reactos :http://www.reactos.org
-NickServ- You failed to identify in time for the nickname Michael
* You are now known as Guest39028
Why is logging in as zimbra messed up?
* Wr4i7h (~a...@a89-154-41-86.cpe.netcabo.pt) has joined #reactos
Is anyone else's forum login screwed up?
<}i{> sudo #reactos
Syllable being a different OS doesn't have to be directly
compatible with Windows and better yet there are efforts to use portable
programming languages like REBOL soon to be replaced with RED. Why
develop ReactOS which has to mimic Windows?
* zwabbit (~chatzi...@dyn-72-33-240-42.uwnet.wisc.edu) has joined
#reactos
Because it's fun
* zwabbit has quit (Changing host)
* zwabbit (~chatzilla@reactos/developer/ZWabbit) has joined #reactos
* ChanServ gives channel operator status to zwabbit
The Syllable approach may make more sense in the long run.
One of the major problems with Windows has been that it doesn't just
work. If Windows was the dominant server system that would be one
thing, but it isn't.
People are writing commercial software for Linux now which
is somewhat similar to MacOS, why not Syllable?
* _dk has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
Syllable admittedly has problems with SATA and probably
isn't 64 bit, but ReactOS isn't 64 bit either.
* hyoenmadan (~oemlic654@189.177.124.164) has joined #reactos
Why ReactOS over Syllable???
Is anyone else's forum login screwed up?
what's your login name
* Wr4i7h has quit ()
zimbra
because daniel banned you?
Since when?
http://www.reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=8852&hilit=zimbra&start=15#p82148
I can't view anything on the forum, so why are you
bothering?
My account is so screwed up, that I can't set the language
correctly and I can't even look at the forum.
then don't sign in
Too late.
it's not hard to log out
* }i{ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
go to the myRosCMS page and on the left hand side there's a
logout link
I've posted so much that I assumed I wouldn't be banned,
especially considering that there were no loggers.
I've posted so much that I assumed I wouldn't be banned,
especially considering that there were no warnings.
there is no rule that a warning needs to be given before a ban
and all of the posts that preceded your final post can be
regarded as implicit warnings by the rest of the community with respect
to
Re: [Freedos-user] {Spam?} [OT] Problems in the ReactOS community...
Freedos has it's place. Unlike ReactOS, Freedos actually works most of the time. Partially due to the fact the Freedos is based on something that is far less complex of course. This is OT, but the relevance is that people suggest using ReactOS if and when Windows is wanted here. As far as don't talk about religion, politics, etcetera, I didn't intend to really. An IRC chat channel about ReactOS is political by nature though where the ReactOS devs and moderators clearly have their own troublesome politics. More troubling, I was threatened with arrest if I get on the ReactOS forums or IRC channel using a different name. For an open source project, it seems to me that the developers and moderators are trying to exert a lot of control over people. Professionalism is completely alien to the ReactOS community as far as I can tell, this is unfortunate and it is why I am recommending the formation of a new community to take over the project. Concerning sanction, that could shape up the current developers. There need to be consequences for unprofessionalism, faschism, etcetera. I honestly wonder if some of the developers are Neo Nazis. Saying it is open source, it cannot be censored for this reason, is dangerous. On this mailing list, talk like that seen on ReactOS IRC is not allowed. The people talking like misbehaved children, not the victims, would be banned from this list. Freedos is a great system for running orphanware and it is a great system for someone who needs to learn about operating systems. I hope dosbox is something that will work in Syllable. -- Using storage to extend the benefits of virtualization and iSCSI Virtualization increases hardware utilization and delivers a new level of agility. Learn what those decisions are and how to modernize your storage and backup environments for virtualization. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51434361/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] {Spam?} [OT] Problems in the ReactOS community...
On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 20:27 -0500, mcelha...@usnetizen.com wrote: > "There need to be consequences for unprofessionalism, faschism, etcetera. I > honestly wonder if some of the developers are Neo Nazis." > > This comes across as just a bit "over-the-top" (and poor spelling as > well...). Fascist, Communist, Socialist, etc., these are people who > will systematically murder, or at best callously allow the deaths of, > millions of human beings in pursuit of their vision of a perfect > world. To say that, "these people must be Nazis 'cause they were mean > to me", shows a total lack of comprehension of what Nazis were and > what they did to people. Just being rude and offensive does not make > someone a Nazi. Get a grip... Do a little research on these people before telling me to get a grip. There is some serious anti religiosity in the ReactOS community where you don't have to look very deep to find it. Nazis were political ideologues who were also fiercely anti religious and totally racist. They were at the extreme of having no respect whatsoever for religiosity in others. Hitler was a dictator and the Nazis were proud of this. It isn't just that people in the ReactOS community were mean to me once, there has been a pattern of cruelty going on over the course of a number of years, possibly a decade. Get drawn into a religious discussion or something similar on the ReactOS IRC channel, expect to get kicked out. Threatening me with prosecution and prison time on the forums though is recent, new, and arguably quite over the top. Someone should call up short people in the ReactOS community who are going too far. Suggesting that I don't have a history of trouble with the ReactOS community without looking into what has happened yourself is disingenuous. There is a difference between heated discussions and discussions laced with hatred. Search the ReactOS forums for nute as well as zimbra. You will see that I have followed ReactOS for a long time and that things have been getting worse, not better, over time for me. I think there is a lot of anti American prejudice in general in the ReactOS community, many of these people are German. I have experienced anti American sentiment from my own German brother-in-law who my sister finally called up short. Not all Germans have an anti American mindset. I'm sure there are people posting on the ReactOS boards that aren't anti American, or at least I hope there are. I am reporting to one open source community that is functional what is going on in another open source community that is not in hopes that something positive will happen. The ReactOS community is the only dysfunctional open source community that I have ever dealt with. Sure, tell me I have no idea what fascism is and dismiss my complaining complete with a transcript to back it up. I'm not a criminal, nor will I profit in any way if the ReactOS project fails. What have I ever said in the ReactOS community that calls for threatening me with prosecution? If nothing merits this, there is proof then that the ReactOS community is troubled and possibly that this trouble is as serious as I suggest. -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] {Spam?} [OT] Problems in the ReactOS community...
On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 08:42 +0200, japhethx gmail wrote: > > What have I ever said > > in the ReactOS community that calls for threatening me with prosecution? > > If nothing merits this, there is proof then that the ReactOS community > > is troubled and possibly that this trouble is as serious as I suggest. > > Judge not, that ye be not judged. > > IOW: don't spam this list with such nonsense! Since you are apparently a > religious person: ask God to forgive the ReactOS people their sins. That's > the > appropriate answer. Have you never heard of the Sermon on the Mount? How does saying, "if nothing merits prosecuting me, the ReactOS community is troubled," rise to the level of passing judgment on people? The argument is, the ReactOS community is troubled and you can clearly see this for yourself if you really want to. If we can't judge that there is discrimination, how can it ever be fought? Where in the sermon on the mount did Christ say, "don't admonish the sinner?" Christ didn't say, "you are not to determine who your enemies are," but this is exactly what you seem to be reading into that sermon. Failing to admonish the sinner, refraining from doing so when it could be effective is itself a sin of omission. Unfortunately, no one person can effectively blow the whistle on the ReactOS community. It is going to take a lot of people speaking out and maybe even the collapse of the ReactOS foundation for real change to take hold. I hope whatever it takes to bring positive change that it happens and happens soon. I haven't spammed the Freedos list. Sorry Japeth, but ReactOS is an open source project just like Freedos where ReactOS is especially relevant to anyone who wants/needs a free Windows NT clone. That both projects involve open source software, the two communities of people can be looked at comparatively and it is reasonable to say that this community is functional while the ReactOS community simply isn't. Do you not know the seriousness of threatening to prosecute someone and have them thrown in jail if they ever attempt to communicate with you again? This is the threat I received from at least one person in the ReactOS community on the forums today. Whether or not there is any weight behind the threat matters, but it is a serious matter even if the threat is weak. What kind of open source project leader/moderator threatens strangers with prosecution for trying to use the forum and/or IRC channels? Political relations wise, this is unnecessary and highly inadvisable behavior. This is the sort of behavior that makes enemies. Wonder why there is a lack of participation in the ReactOS project? Stop wondering, the answer is obvious. -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Open source project suing a stranger...
As final word, we have the right to sue YOU if you reregister with another name for bypassing our ban. In germany we call this Hausrecht. If you wanna discuss this, feel free to join #reactos in about three hours. I will be there. Feel free to sue me, could be real fun ^^ -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Heads up: "DOS ain't dead" forum is closing
On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 19:00 -0500, Michael B. Brutman wrote: > Here is the link to the announcement: > > http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/forum_entry.php?id=10488 > > > To me this is a serious problem - losing a piece of the DOS community is > bad. Losing the place where a lot of the programmers hang out is even > worse. > > > Mike Look at it this way, it is extremely hard to support modern hardware in a DOS style environment because DOS allowed application programs to use hardware directly. Jim Hall has said himself that he has limited interest in the GUI end and most people think a Windows 3.11 Workgroups compatible GUI is too much work. DOS is fast, but Linux stripped down properly is also fast. DOS is great for playing old games, and there are some popular applications for it. Thing is, DOS doesn't make sense at all in the multicore era as a primary operating system. DOS was needed when the personal computer wasn't powerful enough to support a more sophisticated operating system. I'd say that Freedos has it's uses, but without active development on a variant that can take advantage of multiple cores and modern hardware, there are probably a dwindling number of uses for it. Without hardware protection and memory protection, Freedos is certainly fast but probably not acceptable to everyone. -- Using storage to extend the benefits of virtualization and iSCSI Virtualization increases hardware utilization and delivers a new level of agility. Learn what those decisions are and how to modernize your storage and backup environments for virtualization. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51434361/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Heads up: "DOS ain't dead" forum is closing
On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 01:00 +, Zbigniew wrote: > 2011/9/14, Michael C. Robinson : > > > [..] I'd say that Freedos has it's > > uses, but without active development on a variant that can take > > advantage of multiple cores and modern hardware, there are probably a > > dwindling number of uses for it. Without hardware protection and memory > > protection, Freedos is certainly fast but probably not acceptable to > > everyone. > > I'd say, that FreeDOS with hardware protection and memory protection > no longer would be DOS-clone, and that everyone, who needs "advantages > of multiple cores and modern hardware" - and "hardware protection and > memory protection" as well - has a rich choice of other OS-es freely > available, with the requested features already included. 32/64 bit dos environments have never been defined. So in essence, a multicore DOS clone that supports modern hardware is possible without cloning anything. Albeit, if you call it DOS, the old DOS applications need to work in it. Originally, DOS provided routines for working with the video card, hard disk, etcetera, but these routines were short sighted and a series of patches from different parties got applied. MS-DOS got messy towards the end. One interesting option on say a quad core system is to have the 32 bit OS partition the memory, the monitor, the hard disk, and the cpu cores so you can have multiple concurrent 16 bit Freedos instances. Since you are running the equivalent of DOSBOX concurrently, modern hardware can emulate older hardware. Now you have a clean means of supporting modern hardware for people using old DOS applications. Want your multi function printer to appear as a standard printer, fax machine, and scanner? No problem. Microsoft never defined a 32/64 bit version of DOS, so there is a great deal of latitude available. One point I will question you on is this, where is the free equivalent of Windows for WorkGroups? There isn't one. A lot of software depends on the Win32 interface prior to Windows NT taking over. If someone could buy Windows for Workgroups from Microsoft and release the source code to it, that would be very helpful. -- Using storage to extend the benefits of virtualization and iSCSI Virtualization increases hardware utilization and delivers a new level of agility. Learn what those decisions are and how to modernize your storage and backup environments for virtualization. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51434361/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] PPP over Ethernet.
On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 07:26 +0300, bloger wrote: > My ISP require PPPoE. Any idea how to access to network? I just got a Zoom modem that is also a router which doesn't have wireless, very hard to come by these days. Such a device, depending on your needs, can take care of PPPoE for you and you should be able to hook to it with a Freedos system no problem. Barring this, an alternative might be to support PPPoE from a Linux based server. Any idea why PPPoE is being pushed by phone companies? -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] MSDOS to FreeDOS
> Anyways, you can actually dual boot both FreeDOS and MS-DOS. See MetaKern. > > http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=metakern The person may not want to dual boot. Too bad there isn't a free alternative to Windows 3.x that is just as good and capable of running the same software. -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Sound Blaster 16 issues...
A Soundblaster is the industry standard card. If you have a 100% true Soundblaster 16, freedos can use it. I successfully tricked Windows 98SE dos drivers for a PCI soundblaster 16 to work in Freedos. There should be an open source replacement driver for the soundblaster 16 cards, but I don't know how similar these cards really are. I hope an OSS driver is part of freedos 1.1. On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 17:49 -0500, John Ames wrote: > I've got an ISA SB16 on a 486 box I've installed FreeDOS on. I had > trouble installing the driver software to begin with, as the installer > didn't want to run until I booted into MS-DOS 6.22. Now it's > installed, enough that games can recognize and use the hardware. > However, I'm still running into some trouble with it. CTSB16.SYS and > SBCD.SYS both have DEVICE lines in FDCONFIG.SYS, which I copied over > from the CONFIG.SYS created by the installer, as does CTMMSYS.SYS. > However, while CTMMSYS works without issue, CTSB16 and SBCD both crash > during boot. > > This is a bit of a problem, as without these I can't use the companion > CD-ROM drive (and I don't have an IDE controller capable of driving a > newer CD-ROM on hand.) SBCD gives me "Invalid Opcode" error messages, > like some of the other utilities did until I ran them under MS-DOS. > CTSB16, on the other hand, goes insane and prints screenfuls of > gibberish. I've got them both commented out for now, but that still > leaves me with no CD access. > > Does anybody have any idea what, if anything, can be done to get these > working on FreeDOS? Or should I just settle for finding a separate > CD-ROM drive and controller? > > -- > All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a > definitive record of customers, application performance, security > threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes > sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 > ___ > Freedos-user mailing list > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] A christmas release???
I know that Christmas is pretty close, but is it possible that Freedos 1.1 will come out by then? -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Freedos 1.1...
Guess I've been bouncing for about a week. So, will Freedos 1.1 come out by Christmas? Are there any long term plans to replace Windows for Workgroups 3.11 with an equivalent free alternative? How about Wordperfect 6.0a Dos? Anyone interested in reverse engineering it or buying it from I guess Corel? Is anyone interested in 30 pin or 72 pin simms? I have 64 mixed modules where 4 of them are 16 meg 72 pin parity chips, 8 of them are 4 meg 30 pin chips, and there is a combination of SODIMMs, 30 pin simms, and 72 pin simms. The 2 SODIMMs work but they are small, 256meg and 128meg. I believe I have 2 DIMMs mixed in as well, but I'm not sure what they are exactly. Two of the 72 pin simms are 32 meg EDO chips. There are a few 16 meg 72 pin simms and I figure some 8 meg simms as well. I can't test any of the memory, but there is a very good chance that all of it works. If anyone wants it that is willing to pay the shipping, let me know. For inside the U.S., I have to charge at least $10.95. Outside the U.S., I'm uncertain. -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Freedos and real hardware...
Freedos may provide pressure if it is popular enough to stay with well known standard interfaces. If AHCI is going to be a well known interface and it offers some advantage over SATA, Freedos can have a driver for it and there is no reason to worry. In environments that are more time sensitive, where security is an after thought, DOS makes a lot of sense. In the long run, I see Freedos splitting into multiple OSes. Freedos can be maintained on the one hand to work with older commercial DOS software and older PCs, within reason. Another version of Freedos can forego compatibility in favor of providing a 32/64/128 bit OS, okay we don't have 128 bit computers yet. A time is coming when an OS that feels like DOS but supports newer hardware will be needed. Taking advantage of people's DOS skills while providing access to newer hardware will make more and more sense the more computers change. Maybe ReactOS will fill the need for an OS that can support modern hardware if it can be tweaked for real time computing. More likely though, Linux will fill that role. Minix maybe? The biggest problem that I see today is that hardware is still largely a black box. Companies haven't figured out yet that letting the public know how to write drivers for their hardware will make it more sought after and popular. This needs to change. -- Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second resolution app monitoring today. Free. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] To emulate or not to emulate...
I'm using a Freedos system on a play computer, a PIII coppermine system. I'm also multi booting Windows 98SE and Windows 2000. Question is, should I be multi booting or should I be emulating all of these OSes from a more powerful OS on a more powerful computer? For example, there is talk of wanting to be able to play records and listen to AM/FM radio. Can these things be supported from a Freedos system? Drivewire for my color computer requires Windows, but I figure it is too difficult to take care of that issue. Another thought, use Syllable Desktop when the next release comes out as the host OS. Does Syllable support DOSbox? Anyone have experience emulating DOS under Syllable? How about the need to play records and listen to radio? Oh, I have a digital tuner on my network so television watching works, at least under Linux and Windows, from a computer. I mostly use DOS for games. Since my current Freedos system is just a Coppermine PIII, I have avoided emulation. One complaint against a computer based media center supporting radio and records as well as television is that computers are slow and overly complicated to operate. One thought I have is keep the PIII and make it a single boot Freedos system using the KVM switch to change over to it. I wish I could drop the Windows systems, but ReactOS isn't stable yet and I haven't really tried Wine lately. Games of concern are: Diablo II, Red Alert Command and Conquer, Journeyman Project Turbo, in other words old 98SE games. Should I be thinking emulate everything or should I be thinking a newer computer for: record playing, AM/FM radio, movies, and television with the existing PIII system for just games sharing the same console via a KVM switch? I'm thinking Syllable because it looks like a simplified environment where Linux has become rather heavy lately and having to log on even is an issue. The idea that you put a record on the turntable and that it just works makes putting a computer in the equation unacceptable to most people. -- For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second. Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You. Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] To emulate or not to emulate...
I want to be able to play vinyl records, I have a Hauppage PVR150 card connected via PCI to my P3 system. Under Windows 2000, I can use the card to run my Playstation II through the monitor. It may also be possible to run the record player through the soundblaster 16 PCI sound card. Honestly, a more powerful computer emulating an OS that can support plugging in a record player, playstation, etcetera could be very nice potentially. I don't know if anyone has ever connected a record player to a computer (Vinyl) in a dos environment. The base OS could be a hypervisor I suppose or a very lightweight gnome/Linux environment. I'm thinking VMWare possibly, but VirtualBox is free and also possible. If I go the more powerful machine route, I'll want to emulate. In modern hardware, what is the best machine to run Freedos, Windows 98SE, Windows 2000, etcetera simultaneously on virtual hardware? By the way, I got ReactOS to boot finally. Trouble is, the CDROM isn't recognized or usable and the device manager has a long ways to go before it can reliably support adding drivers to the system. Freedos came in very handy to edit freeloader.ini. I don't think ReactOS is designed to operate off of a secondary or tertiary hard drive, something it needs to be designed for. There doesn't seem to be a lot of thought right now concerning ReactOS on real hardware. I'm not even sure what pace the project is progressing at at the moment. I check the web site and occasionally see it mentioned that this or that has been fixed looking at the SVN logs, but there hasn't been another newsletter lately and it looks like 2-3 months is going to be the new release cycle. Good news is, ReactOS works even when I turn all of my hard drives on in the bios and boot from Bare Metal. I have to set up Freedos, WIN98SE, and Win2000 to be hidden though. -- For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second. Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You. Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Printers
Freedos doesn't support any printers, but software programs which run on freedos do. For example, if running WordPerfect 6.0, dos version, you will need a Wordperfect driver for that printer, or one which is close enough. HP Laserjets are a good bet, the pre USB ones in particular like the 6P. Any USB based printers are not likely to work in a DOS environment. DOS environments provide no abstraction for the hardware and no protection either. This is hard for programmers which is why Windows NT took over, but older computers that were slow couldn't run Windows NT. Question I have is, are there any emulators that will make any printer Linux can work with function in a freedos environment on a virtual machine? What class of computer are you running Freedos on and what program do you want to print from? Anything from a Pentium 233 on up can run at least a stripped down Linux system and dosbox. If you can run Linux, perhaps even the latest release of pick some distribution, consider using openoffice or another native Linux software program like gnucash. The latest version of Windows always seems to need more computing horsepower than the last one... I suspect this is on purpose to boost computer sales. Someday maybe, ReactOS will fix that problem. Quoting Kenny Emond : > Hey, > > What type of printer interface/language does FreeDOS support? Does it > support PCL ver3? For example, would I be able to use an HP Deskjet 950c ( > http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=bpd07350&cc=us&dlc=en&lc=en&product=57835 > ) with > FreeDOS? Thanks for the help, > >--- Kenny -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
