> On Oct 17, 2017, at 11:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> I don't know if you saw on our Twitter or on Facebook, but since its
> release on December 25 2016, FreeDOS 1.2 passed 500,000 downloads in
> June 2017. And passed 600,000 in August. As of this week, FreeDOS 1.2
> On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Eric Auer wrote:
>[..]
>> In general, I would include a variety of drivers for modern
>> hardware. As mentioned on BTTR, somebody recently tried a
>> few DOS games on VERY new hardware: First with MS DOS plus
>> Win9x FDISK (fails to boot from harddisk, so he installed
>> to
On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Eric Auer wrote:
In general, I would include a variety of drivers for modern
hardware. As mentioned on BTTR, somebody recently tried a
few DOS games on VERY new hardware: First with MS DOS plus
Win9x FDISK (fails to boot from harddisk, so he installed
to harddisk and used a
On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Ralf Quint wrote:
On 10/17/2017 8:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote:
However, in looking at what "FreeDOS 2.0" might be, I think we are
maintaining some legacy softare that doesn't need to be part of "base"
anymore. So in looking at "FreeDOS 2.0," I am thinking about changing
what
Hi Jim, glad to hear that FreeDOS is so often downloaded :-)
Regarding compatibility, I think about EMS / XMS drivers
and how crashes with their default config might make first
time users give up attempts to try "FreeDOS for fun" and
return to DOSBOX for gaming... I also think about how an
On 10/17/2017 8:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote:
> My thoughts:
>
>
> FreeDOS is meant to be an open source software replacement for MS-DOS.
> As such, "FreeDOS 2.0" must maintain compatibility with MS-DOS. I am
> not suggesting changing core compatibility. "FreeDOS 2.0" needs to
> remain 16-bit, with a
Hi all
I don't know if you saw on our Twitter or on Facebook, but since its
release on December 25 2016, FreeDOS 1.2 passed 500,000 downloads in
June 2017. And passed 600,000 in August. As of this week, FreeDOS 1.2
has been downloaded over 671,500 times.
I've lately wondered what should come