>> Right now, I am trying to install Windows for Workgroups 3.11. Is it
>> possible to use it with higher resolutions? For instance 1024x768 16
>> millions colors. Is the process straightforward???
If there are generic VESA drivers, it should be possible...?
> Unfortunately, my understanding is that Windows 3.11 won't
> work on top of Freedos. Windows 3.1 works in standard mode.
> Windows 3.11 is supposed to offer crude multitasking, but
> the freedos kernel is evidently not compatible with it.
You would have to use an experimental version of the unstable
branch of the kernel: It is included in FreeDOS 1.0 under the
name Winkernel. Still Windows 3 do not run very well on modern
hardware at all. Try without EMM386, with Japheth's versions
of HIMEMX and SHARE, and tell HIMEMX to make at most 256 MB
of RAM available. With some tweaking of the Windows config,
it is possible to use up to 1 GB, but not more. You also have
to tell Windows not to use protected mode disk drivers etc.
I am not sure whether the latter is possible with WfW 3.11.
You may have to use FAT16/CHS otherwise, in the first 8 GB
of your disk, I guess.
> I have Windows 3.1 working on top of freedos, but I
> admittedly never use it.
Can you tell which problems you encountered and which
config options you recommend for that? On old hardware,
Windows 3 and 3.1 standard mode should be relatively
tame, but there still might be some tricks necessary?
The good thing is that no special kernel is needed,
a normal FreeDOS kernel is happy with standard mode.
> I don't think anyone really believes in Windows on top of
> Freedos. The ReactOS project that is trying to replace
> Windows XP directly with an OSS operating system started
> out trying to clone Windows 95...
Plus there is Wine for Linux, which can imitate a
variety of different Windows versions :-).
> Dos is inherently insecure, there is no user
> context and no hardware protection of any kind.
Some people might have Windows software which
actually needs unprotected hardware, dunno...
Using HXRT to run it directly in DOS might be
an option in such cases.
> What Windows software are you interested in that will run
> on Windows 3.11? I think you will find that most software
> requires either Windows 98SE or Windows XP, neither of
> which will run on top of freedos.
> Ask yourself, is Windows really an enhancement for a dos
> based system? Windows on top of dos is insecure and
> always will be. DOS is the quick and dirty operating
> system that was dominant on PCs in the early days up
> until the mid to late 90s. The advantage of dos is
> that it's simple and there are plenty of apps for it.
> There is no way to protect software
You can use FDSHIELD to reduce the impact of old DOS
viruses and reduce the ability of DOS users to shoot
in their own foot, but of course because there is no
hardware-assisted protection, users and viruses which
know how FDSHIELD works can patch / disable it in RAM.
> In a Windows XP environment, you can't install software
> at all if you aren't root.
I think you can, but most installers want to put files
into writeable-only-by-admin areas which makes it harder.
> Reconsider running Windows for Workgroups etcetera.
> There is the Syllable desktop operating system and there are
> umpteen versions of Linux. ReactOS isn't stable yet, but it
> should be getting much better in the next 6-12 months.
Good to hear :-)
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time,
vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have
the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize
details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge
Freedos-user mailing list