Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Harald Arnesen]

Jim Hall [01.05.2021 23:00]:

> BTW, if anyone is interested in troff (or variants) there's an
> interesting history in Brian Kernighan's book, "Unix: A History and a
> Memoir." It starts on page 98. In brief:

Anyone remotely interested in the history of Unix must read this book.
-- 
Hilsen Harald


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Thank you, Jim for this overview on roff - groff. 
And, by the way, if someone is about music typesetting, check out 
http://lilypond.org/   which is kind-of-similar to *roff but for music. 
The score can be written as code on FreeDOS with any text editor ;-)
-Thomas

> On Sat,20210501- week17, at 23:00, Jim Hall  wrote:
> 
>> On 4/25/2021 10:43 PM, TK Chia wrote:
> [..]
>>> troff (as groff) is still very much alive today, as far as I can tell.
>>> And the troff format is still the default source format for man pages on
>>> Linux.  It is quite a good format for the job, if you ask me.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 1:54 AM Ralf Quint  wrote:
>> Well, it all depends on what you are used to. I haven't used any of that
>> troff (etc) stuff in +30 years now, ever since GUI deskops and apps for
>> it started to become usable.
> [..]
> 
> BTW, if anyone is interested in troff (or variants) there's an
> interesting history in Brian Kernighan's book, "Unix: A History and a
> Memoir." It starts on page 98. In brief:
> 
> Jerry Saltzer's Runoff program was an early text formatting system,
> originally for CTSS. It used macros like this:
> 
> .ce
> This is a centered (ce) line.
> .ti 5
> This line has a starting text indent (ti) of 5 spaces.
> 
> 
> While at MIT, Kernighan wrote a simple implementation of Runoff called
> Roff ("an abbreviated Runoff")
> 
> Joe Ossanna at Bell Labs (Unix team) later wrote a similar but more
> powerful implementation called Nroff (for "New Roff") that generated
> output suitable for the typewriter-like printers at the time
> 
> When the Unix team acquired a phototypesetting machine, Joe made
> significant updates to Nroff to create Troff (for "Typesetter Roff")
> to drive the typesetter
> 
> Kernighan later updated Troff to become the Device Independent Troff
> (still called "Troff" but I've also seen this referenced as "ditroff")
> with a typesetter description language that allowed Troff to produce
> output for different kinds of devices
> 
> And much later, GNU wrote a new implementation called Groff ("GNU Roff")
> 
> 
> I've written a few articles for OpenSource.com about using groff. The
> latest one is here:
> https://opensource.com/article/21/4/groff-programmer
> 
> (It even includes a groff source file using the "-me" macros)
> 
> 
> At the time, writing documents in nroff/troff/groff was as common as
> writing documentation in Markdown today.
> 
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jim Hall]

> On 4/25/2021 10:43 PM, TK Chia wrote:
[..]
> > troff (as groff) is still very much alive today, as far as I can tell.
> > And the troff format is still the default source format for man pages on
> > Linux.  It is quite a good format for the job, if you ask me.

On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 1:54 AM Ralf Quint  wrote:
> Well, it all depends on what you are used to. I haven't used any of that
> troff (etc) stuff in +30 years now, ever since GUI deskops and apps for
> it started to become usable.
[..]

BTW, if anyone is interested in troff (or variants) there's an
interesting history in Brian Kernighan's book, "Unix: A History and a
Memoir." It starts on page 98. In brief:

Jerry Saltzer's Runoff program was an early text formatting system,
originally for CTSS. It used macros like this:

.ce
This is a centered (ce) line.
.ti 5
This line has a starting text indent (ti) of 5 spaces.


While at MIT, Kernighan wrote a simple implementation of Runoff called
Roff ("an abbreviated Runoff")

Joe Ossanna at Bell Labs (Unix team) later wrote a similar but more
powerful implementation called Nroff (for "New Roff") that generated
output suitable for the typewriter-like printers at the time

When the Unix team acquired a phototypesetting machine, Joe made
significant updates to Nroff to create Troff (for "Typesetter Roff")
to drive the typesetter

Kernighan later updated Troff to become the Device Independent Troff
(still called "Troff" but I've also seen this referenced as "ditroff")
with a typesetter description language that allowed Troff to produce
output for different kinds of devices

And much later, GNU wrote a new implementation called Groff ("GNU Roff")


I've written a few articles for OpenSource.com about using groff. The
latest one is here:
https://opensource.com/article/21/4/groff-programmer

(It even includes a groff source file using the "-me" macros)


At the time, writing documents in nroff/troff/groff was as common as
writing documentation in Markdown today.


Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jim Hall]

> On 4/22/2021 3:21 AM, Thomas Desi wrote:
> > There are many different reasons why people would want to install FreeDOS 
> > (if they get to know it).
> > „ Different" like in „different people“. The needs and equipments are 
> > different and the mixture of technical generations
> > should not restrain FreeDOS, IMHO, to „retro computing“ and nostalgia only. 
> > Nostalgia is very much ok and brings up new and other thoughts, too. But 
> > there is 2021, too.
> > I understand that there is a difference when installing on to Harddisk and 
> > booting, or just having a USB Stick and using it on top of Linux or Windows.
> > It depends, as I say, on what people want, and - what they could want if 
> > the just knew…


On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:57 AM Ralf Quint  wrote:
>
> Well, here I think lays a huge problem for us (the FreeDOS project), a
> lot of people don't seem to know what they want. There are always a
> number of people showing up at random times, who come up with all kinds
> of glorious ideas or serious (in their eyes) complaints as what to add
> or change in FreeDOS. Which, when looked at it at the baseline of those
> ideas, would result in a second coming of Linux.
> These are a lot of times people that voice their grievances about how
> bad Windows/Microsoft is, even if the only practical reason is that it
> seems to be en vogue in certain circle to bash on Windows/Microsoft.
> Or there are those people that can't cope with the alleged complexity of
> Linux, thinking of (Free)DOS as being their savior, but then requiring
> all those complexities, which would result in something that is looking
> like just another Linux. Or Windows. Or macOS...
>
> It seems to be hard for some people to see that FreeDOS is indeed a lot
> more retro than cutting edge. And that some things just are not a real
> fit for FreeDOS. Like someone on the FB page recently suggesting that it
> would be great to have a Apache/MySQL/PHP stack on FreeDOS. Without
> actually thinking about or realizing that the very design of DOS makes
> such an endeavor rather unfeasible...

I get a lot of the emails you described. People email me to ask why
FreeDOS doesn't run on their Raspberry Pi like Linux does .. or why
FreeDOS can't take advantage of multiple CPUs and cores like Linux
does .. or why FreeDOS can't run on their UEFI-only system (no
"Legacy" mode) like Windows can .. or why FreeDOS doesn't have a
default GUI like Windows .. or the one you mentioned from the Facebook
group asking how to run an Apache/MySQL/PHP stack on a single FreeDOS
box.

FreeDOS has the same basic design as any other DOS, and that means
FreeDOS also has the same limitations as DOS. FreeDOS requires an
Intel CPU and a BIOS. FreeDOS is "single-user" and "single-tasking,"
and runs on just one CPU. FreeDOS is 16-bit, so it has the memory and
disk limitations of a 16-bit system.

That said, I think FreeDOS is a great implementation of DOS. We have
more tools and features than any other DOS from the 1990s era, yet
we're still "DOS." FreeDOS is very compatible with MS-DOS .. I've only
found one or two programs that don't run on FreeDOS, and usually these
are trying to poke into some MS-DOS memory location.

FreeDOS is DOS plus a bunch of cool tools. FreeDOS isn't Linux, or
Windows, or Mac. But as a DOS, FreeDOS is pretty great.


Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Yes, Andrew:


The "snapback" I see for example (?) to earlier-era ethos by way of typewriters 
is echoed in the newer generation who realise the delight of using ancient (for example, 
IBM) *mechanical* keyboards over the standard bubblewrap that is marketed with modern, 
built-to-self-destruct consumer-level laptops.


I buy metal garden tools, not cheap-and-break-easily plastic commodities!


In a similar way I guess, the FreeDOS environment offers a window back to that golden age 
of the de-cluttered work ethic where the user actually *produced* things - rather than 
serve primarily as a consumer being continually prescribed "products".


Yes, I have been editing HTML code, noticing aesthetic elegance!


These products - or distractions - could be in the form of ribbon-based 
interfaces, all the data-mining that goes on with social media interfaces - all 
the bells and whistles that come with a modern poker/gaming machine.


That's more trouble than it's worth.
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Ralf, 

yes, efficiency might even be something or personal preference, I am not sure. 
I am fiddling with a „made-to-measure“ keyboard and stuff to get a single task 
system for me with mouse/foot-pedal and dedicated keys woven together, using 
non proprietory software („FreeDOS“ instead of Windows)

T.

> Am 26.04.2021 um 05:59 schrieb Ralf Quint :
> 
> On 4/23/2021 1:44 PM, Thomas Desi wrote:
>> Hi Ralf,
>> 
>> good to focus on the “whys”.
>> 
>> You said:
>> 
>> | “Nor would I do any graphics work in DOS, or any word
>> | processing these days.”
>> 
>> I did get into DOS because of “word processing”.
>> 
>> More precisely it is a text-processing tool(!) EVA.EXE which was developed 
>> by Primož Jakopin in the 1970ies and 80ies, ported to TOS on Atari, in the 
>> 1990ies to DOS and WINDOWS. I re-discovered it last year on his site and 
>> also got in good contact with him. He still is working on it...
> I am not sure if that is any more efficient for at least 99.99% of all use 
> cases then using LibreOfiice/OpenOffice Writer, Microsoft Word or WordPerfect 
> on Windows or Linux GUI based systems.
>> Moreover, I am a German native and Primož Jakopin is from Slovenia. 
>> Especially the letter was a challenge in the past (ASCII code page) to get 
>> all diacritics right. This has changed since, using UTF-8, which has 
>> appeared in DOS via MinEd, Blocek ed. al.
> But that is heavily dependent on those application, as anything but single 
> byte ASCII variations aren't native to DOS...
>> Still an excellent tool I consider TROFF, now GROFF, for Unix/Linux -which 
>> also exists for Windows, appeared in 1990 (Version 0.3.1) by James Clark) 
>> coming from  “a text-formatting program called RUNOFF, which was written by 
>> Jerome H. Saltzer for MIT's CTSS operating system in the mid-1960s!
> I wouldn't touch any of that stuff with a barge pole these days. Either 
> LibreOffice Writer already fits the bill, or I would much rather use a tool 
> like Scribus these days...
>> I am still wondering if there might be a comparable product like the 
>> “Raspberry” but for an architecture that allows for FreeDOS natively?
> 
> Yes, there are such products, unfortunately not for the same price point...
> 
> Ralf
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Andrew Robins]

Sorry - lurking, but my 2c briefly:
there's a lot to be said for the self-satisfying, validating feeling of 
actually physically handcrafting your thoughts for contribution to the broader 
society as a whole. Whether those efforts actually makes an impact on that 
society... well, does that really matter? The "snapback" I see for example (?) 
to earlier-era ethos by way of typewriters is echoed in the newer generation 
who realise the delight of using ancient (for example, IBM) *mechanical* 
keyboards over the standard bubblewrap that is marketed with modern, 
built-to-self-destruct consumer-level laptops. In a similar way I guess, the 
FreeDOS environment offers a window back to that golden age of the de-cluttered 
work ethic where the user actually *produced* things - rather than serve 
primarily as a consumer being continually prescribed "products".  These 
products - or distractions - could be in the form of ribbon-based interfaces, 
all the data-mining that goes on with social media interfaces - all the bells 
and whistles that come with a modern poker/gaming machine. Sadly now it appears 
that with all the marketing that characterises the modern digital world - 
broadly speaking, the "tool" has been flipped from the original side of the 
keyboard. 

What happened when George R.R. Martin "upgraded" from his beloved DOS Word to a 
new machine with the latest M$ Orifice??  Well, his output stalled and *still 
waiting* after 10 years for Winter to actually arrive in the bookstores. 
So FreeDOS to me represents the freedom to just be with my thoughts, use tools 
that are perfectly suited to my requirements (I maintain and use "vintage" IBM 
ThinkPads as my daily drivers, for example). And I don't have to run on the 
hamsterwheel for continually having to upgrade my equipment. It's work, people 
- not Market Science.



> ___
> 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] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jim Hall]

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 2:45 AM Thomas Desi  wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> yes, the roff-troff-groff (sounds like barking?) story reminds me in
>some way to FreeDos.
>
> Compared to LaTex (or Tex), groff is so much leaner and easier. It
>is still well maintained and usable.
>
> It allows output to html, text, ps, pdf… and regarding typsetting
>hardly anything coming near, if one has the eye for it. The source
>file can easily be created by any DOS editor. The rendering can be
>done on *ux, Windwos or Mac.
>
> Groff -MOM was a »nice try« for prose writing, but to have all those
>long instructions to type, feels counterproductive. if you would want
>to have a very beautiful typesetted novel or book, (better avoid
>images!) - and have some time to understand the inner workings of
>»-mom«, this might be the best rendering.
>
> You are right, Jim, the -me and -ms instructions are so handy and
> short that I don’t think -mom ever cought on. It is though really
> well documentated.
[..]

I've used LaTeX too. It's a good system and was a perfect fit when I
needed to write documents that included equations (during my time at
university as a physics undergraduate student). But once I didn't need
to do that anymore, I stopped using LaTeX to write documents.

When I first switched to Linux, I dual-booted with DOS so I could run
my DOS applications like my word processor (WordPerfect, then Galaxy)
and spreadsheet (As-Easy-As). But for some things, I learned how to
use groff to write documents. I already knew LaTeX, so groff wasn't
too hard to pick up. I think I learned -mm first, but found -me was
easier to write papers for class, so I used that instead. And I kind
of stuck with it. These days, I don't often write in groff, but I do
so just often enough that I still remember how to write with it. It's
an elegant system in its own way. And it has an interesting history,
if you like computer history. (See Kernighan's 'UNIX: A History and a
Memoir.')

I don't have the energy to learn a new macro system, so that's
probably why I haven't been able to stick with -mom. I already know
how to use -me and I don't *need* to learn another one. So the -mom
macros never stick with me.

Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jim Hall]

On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:43 PM Bryan Kilgallin  wrote:
>
> Thanks, Jim:
>
> > I also write a lot of tech articles in raw HTML. I use HTML when I
> > can't get the formatting I want through other means. What I like about
> > using HTML5 is the semantic code, so the tags hold some meaning.
>
> I currently use table and td. What is preferable about aside, figure and
> figcaption?


I don't want to get off topic from the email list, but the short
answer is: Using semantic tags makes it easier for screen readers and
other assistive technology to help the user.

As a tech writer, I also like that semantic tags hold meaning within
the document. I can write the document using the tags that are
appropriate for the content, and I don't have to worry about
presentation. For example,  and  and  all render text in
italics, but they mean different things ( is for idiomatic text or
technical terms,  is when you need to apply emphasis to part of a
statement, and  is for citations like book titles). I leave
presentation for the stylesheets (CSS). And I try to add very little
"presentation" tags to my documents.

If you use  and  to create a web page, you are assuming the
browser is wide enough to display the table content you want to show.
That can cause certain problems on mobile devices, for example - or
for users who need assistive technology. Only use  and 
when you need to display data in a table.

If you want to discuss HTML further, I'm happy to - but we should
probably take that discussion off-list.


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Liam Proven]

On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 at 10:03, Thomas Desi  wrote:
>
> Hi Liam,
>
> maybe this is not the place to ask, but, vDOS looks nice. Strangely it can 
> not run the »Eve.exe«.
> (Neither does DOSbox). Funny. Only FreeDOS allows. Might be a video issue.

I am not sure why you are replying to me, as I did not recommend vDos,
link to it or anything. You were the one who introduced it to the
thread.

Personally, I do not routinely run Windows for anything anywhere. I
use Linux and macOS both at home and at work. I keep Windows around on
most of my machines, mainly for reflashing firmware and things, but
it's not in daily, weekly or even monthly use.

I am vaguely aware of vDos as there is a Mac port of it, which is used
for running DOS WordPerfect on Macs:
http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/vdoswp.html

I have tried that and it works. The font rendering is nice, the
host-OS interoperability is nice, but it also feels like a fragile
solution to me and I do not routinely use it.

When I want to use DOS on a modern 64-bit OS, I run it in a VM. For
me, usually VirtualBox, because it is both FOSS and cross-platform.
However it is hard to move files between host and guest OSes. I am
working on a DOS networking stack to run in DOS under VirtualBox but
it's low on my to-do list.

On Linux, there is DOSemu. This runs a real copy of DOS in a dedicated
VM but also sets up host/guest integration. It works well and I like
it. I was at a talk on DOSemu 2 which could be a significant
improvement -- but I have not played with it yet, as AFAIK no
distribution includes it so far.

I note that DOSemu 1 on Debian, Ubuntu, openSUSE etc. still includes
FreeDOS 0.9-something, pre-1.0 as far as I can recall. That might be
something for the FreeDOS team to investigate and rectify. :-)



-- 
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Hi Liam, 

maybe this is not the place to ask, but, vDOS looks nice. Strangely it can not 
run the »Eve.exe«.
(Neither does DOSbox). Funny. Only FreeDOS allows. Might be a video issue.

regards, 
Thomas

> On Mon,20210426- week17, at 18:59, Liam Proven  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 at 06:01, Ralf Quint  wrote:
> 
>> I am not sure if that is any more efficient for at least 99.99% of all
>> use cases then using LibreOfiice/OpenOffice Writer, Microsoft Word or
>> WordPerfect on Windows or Linux GUI based systems.
> 
> It depends what you want or need.
> 
> In my day job as a text writer, I mostly work in DocBook XML or
> AsciiDoc, so I use FOSS editors for Linux that understand those
> formats.
> 
> As a journalist and freelance tech writer, I mostly worked in an outliner.
> 
> http://www.outliners.com/
> 
> This used to be a major category for DOS and in the DOS era there were many.
> 
> https://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/6291
> 
> However, these days, only one major WP still includes an outliner: MS
> Word. For this reason, I keep an old copy of Word under WINE on my
> Linux laptops: usually Word 97. None of the rest of Office, just Word.
> 
> Sadly there is nothing else like its outliner any more. WPS Office has
> one but it's very clunky and I find WPS Office to have a bad UI these
> days -- it is mandatory Ribbon-style, which I hate. It used to have
> proper menus, but those old versions had a poor, barely-working
> outliner. LibreOffice doesn't have one at all, and nor does any other
> FOSS tool I know.
> 
> (Note, there are 2 kinds of outliner: intrinsic and extrinsic.
> Extrinsic or 2-pane outliners are a sort of mind-mapping or organizing
> tool. Only intrinsic ones are any use to me as a writer. Sadly there
> are plentiful FOSS extrinsic  outliners but they're no use to me.)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
> Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
> Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
> UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Hi Jim, 
yes, the roff-troff-groff (sounds like barking?) story reminds me in some way 
to FreeDos.
Compared to LaTex (or Tex), groff is so much leaner and easier. It is still 
well maintained and usable.
It allows output to html, text, ps, pdf… and regarding typsetting hardly 
anything coming near, if one has the eye for it. The source file can easily be 
created by any DOS editor. The rendering can be done on *ux, Windwos or Mac.

Groff -MOM was a »nice try« for prose writing, but to have all those long 
instructions to type, feels counterproductive. if you would want to have a very 
beautiful typesetted novel or book, (better avoid images!) - and have some time 
to understand the inner workings of »-mom«, this might be the best rendering.

You are right, Jim, the -me and -ms instructions are so handy and short that I 
don’t think -mom ever cought on. It is though really well documentated. 

So, new products aren’t better because they are new… We can observe that most 
dynamics are around »marketing« and about specialising (like using Indesgin 
ed.al. for typesetting).

I already mentioned »Markdown« (or use ».fountain« for scripts with dialogues 
in it). This is easy to write on any editor (DOS!) and then render it on a 
»daily machine«.

Obviously most of us have at least two computers, one for »daily life«, using 
linux, windows or MacOS, and another for fun or nostalgia or how you would call 
it. This gains even more momentum, when I go to work on my DOS itx to just 
focus on writing. It’s like a better typewriter for me because I can save the 
work and send it digitally. 

The bottom line here is that I set a »red line« for me what NOT to try with 
DOS. This red line defines for me a point, where a recent system would win. So 
if I use DOS, it has to be »bare metal« to get the essence of it: simplicity, 
speed, privacy. (printing, USB… now I understand are more like »can it be 
done?« for fun. If you have the time and knowledge.)

-Thomas

NB: The typwriter has really become obsolete, but mechanical typewriters at the 
moment sell beautifully. Aesthetics? Computer aesthetics (!?) are quite 
»different«… 




> On Mon,20210426- week17, at 23:45, Jim Hall  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 12:45 AM TK Chia  wrote:
>> 
>> Hello Ralf,
>> 
 Still an excellent tool I consider TROFF, now GROFF, for Unix/Linux
 -which also exists for Windows, appeared in 1990 (Version 0.3.1) by
 James Clark) coming from  “a text-formatting program called RUNOFF,
 which was written by Jerome H. Saltzer for MIT's CTSS operating system
 in the mid-1960s!
>> 
>>> I wouldn't touch any of that stuff with a barge pole these days. Either
>>> LibreOffice Writer already fits the bill, or I would much rather use a
>>> tool like Scribus these days...
>> 
>> troff (as groff) is still very much alive today, as far as I can tell.
>> And the troff format is still the default source format for man pages on
>> Linux.  It is quite a good format for the job, if you ask me.
>> 
> 
> I use a mix of different tools for my tech writing. I write for a few
> places, mostly OpenSource.com and CloudSavvy IT.
> 
> I use groff just often enough that I remember how to use groff. I
> usually use the -me macro set. I tried to adapt to -mom but I think my
> mind is still "geared" for -me macros. :-)
> 
> I also write a lot of tech articles in raw HTML. I use HTML when I
> can't get the formatting I want through other means. What I like about
> using HTML5 is the semantic code, so the tags hold some meaning. This
> is also a great addition for screen readers and other accessibility
> tools, so the tools can help the user navigate and consume the
> document.
> 
> But for most of my tech writing, I use a word processor, and send the
> output to my editor. I run Linux as my desktop, and I prefer
> LibreOffice Writer. It's a great tool.
> 
> When I need to generate something for print (like flyers or postcards
> for my business, etc) I use Scribus. I find Scribus takes some time to
> figure out, but it's still easy to figure out. The learning curve
> isn't too steep.
> 
> 
> That said, when I do any writing on DOS, I like to use a word
> processor. I used several DOS word processors "back in the day." In
> high school, I learned how to use WordPerfect, so I used WordPerfect
> when I went to university. But the upgrade for WordPerfect was pretty
> expensive (I think $300 for a student copy) so instead I switched to a
> shareware word processor called Galaxy (I think $99). At a third of
> the price, Galaxy had all the features I needed to write papers for
> class.
> 
> These days, my favorite DOS word processor is Microsoft Word for DOS.
> Microsoft released a copy for free on their download.microsoft.com
> website. It feels quite modern compared to today's word processors.
> The key combinations that you just "assume" on today's word processors
> work in Word for DOS. Ctrl-i for italics, ctrl-b for bold, etc. That
> works well for me.
> 
> 

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Dear Liam:


Under Linux, I used "manuskript" to write a memoir.


Interesting -- thanks, that's a new one to me. I have had a very brief
play -- it crashes in seconds on macOS which I happen to be using at
this moment -- but it looks like it has a lot of extra functionality
I'd not need -- character tracking, plots, etc., rather like Scrivener
-- but if the outliner is capable, it could help me.


In Ubuntu, I found that I needed to be careful about putting its folders 
where it expected them. So my memoir project file Social.msk is in the 
last numbered manuskript folder within the snap folder in my home 
folder. This stopped a problem of crashing such as you had mentioned.

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Thanks, Jim:


I also write a lot of tech articles in raw HTML. I use HTML when I
can't get the formatting I want through other means. What I like about
using HTML5 is the semantic code, so the tags hold some meaning.


I currently use table and td. What is preferable about aside, figure and 
figcaption?

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Liam Proven]

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 at 23:47, Jim Hall  wrote:

> These days, my favorite DOS word processor is Microsoft Word for DOS.
> Microsoft released a copy for free on their download.microsoft.com
> website. It feels quite modern compared to today's word processors.
> The key combinations that you just "assume" on today's word processors
> work in Word for DOS. Ctrl-i for italics, ctrl-b for bold, etc. That
> works well for me.

Absolutely -- Word 5.5 for DOS is good and completely free. It was MS'
way of offering a Y2K fix with minimal effort.

Sadly, it doesn't also apply to Word 6, which was the last ever
version and which is a more pleasant tool IMHO. Word 6 uses the same
menu layouts and file formats as Word 6 on Mac and 16-bit Windows, and
Word 95 on 32-bit Windows, and can round-trip documents just fine.

The outliner works better in 6, too. :-(

I do own copies of Word 97 and Office 2000, so I think I can use
down-level versions legally, but sadly Word 6 is not freeware.

-- 
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Liam Proven]

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 at 19:57, Bryan Kilgallin  wrote:
>
> Under Linux, I used "manuskript" to write a memoir.

Interesting -- thanks, that's a new one to me. I have had a very brief
play -- it crashes in seconds on macOS which I happen to be using at
this moment -- but it looks like it has a lot of extra functionality
I'd not need -- character tracking, plots, etc., rather like Scrivener
-- but if the outliner is capable, it could help me.


-- 
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jim Hall]

On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 12:45 AM TK Chia  wrote:
>
> Hello Ralf,
>
> >> Still an excellent tool I consider TROFF, now GROFF, for Unix/Linux
> >> -which also exists for Windows, appeared in 1990 (Version 0.3.1) by
> >> James Clark) coming from  “a text-formatting program called RUNOFF,
> >> which was written by Jerome H. Saltzer for MIT's CTSS operating system
> >> in the mid-1960s!
>
> > I wouldn't touch any of that stuff with a barge pole these days. Either
> > LibreOffice Writer already fits the bill, or I would much rather use a
> > tool like Scribus these days...
>
> troff (as groff) is still very much alive today, as far as I can tell.
> And the troff format is still the default source format for man pages on
> Linux.  It is quite a good format for the job, if you ask me.
>

I use a mix of different tools for my tech writing. I write for a few
places, mostly OpenSource.com and CloudSavvy IT.

I use groff just often enough that I remember how to use groff. I
usually use the -me macro set. I tried to adapt to -mom but I think my
mind is still "geared" for -me macros. :-)

I also write a lot of tech articles in raw HTML. I use HTML when I
can't get the formatting I want through other means. What I like about
using HTML5 is the semantic code, so the tags hold some meaning. This
is also a great addition for screen readers and other accessibility
tools, so the tools can help the user navigate and consume the
document.

But for most of my tech writing, I use a word processor, and send the
output to my editor. I run Linux as my desktop, and I prefer
LibreOffice Writer. It's a great tool.

When I need to generate something for print (like flyers or postcards
for my business, etc) I use Scribus. I find Scribus takes some time to
figure out, but it's still easy to figure out. The learning curve
isn't too steep.


That said, when I do any writing on DOS, I like to use a word
processor. I used several DOS word processors "back in the day." In
high school, I learned how to use WordPerfect, so I used WordPerfect
when I went to university. But the upgrade for WordPerfect was pretty
expensive (I think $300 for a student copy) so instead I switched to a
shareware word processor called Galaxy (I think $99). At a third of
the price, Galaxy had all the features I needed to write papers for
class.

These days, my favorite DOS word processor is Microsoft Word for DOS.
Microsoft released a copy for free on their download.microsoft.com
website. It feels quite modern compared to today's word processors.
The key combinations that you just "assume" on today's word processors
work in Word for DOS. Ctrl-i for italics, ctrl-b for bold, etc. That
works well for me.


Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Liam Proven]

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 at 19:33, Thomas Desi  wrote:
>
> Interesting!
> Some „folding“, like in VIM (zf)  and others could be used as „outliner“.

Folding is not the same thing, although it is one small element of
what an outliner does.


> http://www.outliners.com/is unfortunately a 404 (April 26, 2021,19:29)

Strange. For me, it automatically redirects, and I copied and pasted
the URL directly.

http://outliners.scripting.com/ is the redirect.


-- 
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Liam:


As a journalist and freelance tech writer, I mostly worked in an outliner.

http://www.outliners.com/


That should be "http://outliners.scripting.com/;.


Sadly there is nothing else like its outliner any more.


Under Linux, I used "manuskript" to write a memoir.
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Interesting!
Some „folding“, like in VIM (zf)  and others could be used as „outliner“.

http://www.outliners.com/ is unfortunately a 404 
(April 26, 2021,19:29)

I will give https://www.vdos.info/download.html 
 a try if I can run something on it. 
;9
Thanks, Thomas


> Am 26.04.2021 um 18:59 schrieb Liam Proven :
> 
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 at 06:01, Ralf Quint  wrote:
> 
>> I am not sure if that is any more efficient for at least 99.99% of all
>> use cases then using LibreOfiice/OpenOffice Writer, Microsoft Word or
>> WordPerfect on Windows or Linux GUI based systems.
> 
> It depends what you want or need.
> 
> In my day job as a text writer, I mostly work in DocBook XML or
> AsciiDoc, so I use FOSS editors for Linux that understand those
> formats.
> 
> As a journalist and freelance tech writer, I mostly worked in an outliner.
> 
> http://www.outliners.com/
> 
> This used to be a major category for DOS and in the DOS era there were many.
> 
> https://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/6291
> 
> However, these days, only one major WP still includes an outliner: MS
> Word. For this reason, I keep an old copy of Word under WINE on my
> Linux laptops: usually Word 97. None of the rest of Office, just Word.
> 
> Sadly there is nothing else like its outliner any more. WPS Office has
> one but it's very clunky and I find WPS Office to have a bad UI these
> days -- it is mandatory Ribbon-style, which I hate. It used to have
> proper menus, but those old versions had a poor, barely-working
> outliner. LibreOffice doesn't have one at all, and nor does any other
> FOSS tool I know.
> 
> (Note, there are 2 kinds of outliner: intrinsic and extrinsic.
> Extrinsic or 2-pane outliners are a sort of mind-mapping or organizing
> tool. Only intrinsic ones are any use to me as a writer. Sadly there
> are plentiful FOSS extrinsic  outliners but they're no use to me.)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
> Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
> Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
> UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Liam Proven]

On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 at 06:01, Ralf Quint  wrote:

> I am not sure if that is any more efficient for at least 99.99% of all
> use cases then using LibreOfiice/OpenOffice Writer, Microsoft Word or
> WordPerfect on Windows or Linux GUI based systems.

It depends what you want or need.

In my day job as a text writer, I mostly work in DocBook XML or
AsciiDoc, so I use FOSS editors for Linux that understand those
formats.

As a journalist and freelance tech writer, I mostly worked in an outliner.

http://www.outliners.com/

This used to be a major category for DOS and in the DOS era there were many.

https://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/6291

However, these days, only one major WP still includes an outliner: MS
Word. For this reason, I keep an old copy of Word under WINE on my
Linux laptops: usually Word 97. None of the rest of Office, just Word.

Sadly there is nothing else like its outliner any more. WPS Office has
one but it's very clunky and I find WPS Office to have a bad UI these
days -- it is mandatory Ribbon-style, which I hate. It used to have
proper menus, but those old versions had a poor, barely-working
outliner. LibreOffice doesn't have one at all, and nor does any other
FOSS tool I know.

(Note, there are 2 kinds of outliner: intrinsic and extrinsic.
Extrinsic or 2-pane outliners are a sort of mind-mapping or organizing
tool. Only intrinsic ones are any use to me as a writer. Sadly there
are plentiful FOSS extrinsic  outliners but they're no use to me.)


-- 
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Ralf Quint]

On 4/25/2021 10:43 PM, TK Chia wrote:

Hello Ralf,


Still an excellent tool I consider TROFF, now GROFF, for Unix/Linux
-which also exists for Windows, appeared in 1990 (Version 0.3.1) by
James Clark) coming from  “a text-formatting program called RUNOFF,
which was written by Jerome H. Saltzer for MIT's CTSS operating system
in the mid-1960s!



I wouldn't touch any of that stuff with a barge pole these days. Either
LibreOffice Writer already fits the bill, or I would much rather use a
tool like Scribus these days...


troff (as groff) is still very much alive today, as far as I can tell.
And the troff format is still the default source format for man pages on
Linux.  It is quite a good format for the job, if you ask me. 


Well, it all depends on what you are used to. I haven't used any of that 
troff (etc) stuff in +30 years now, ever since GUI deskops and apps for 
it started to become usable. Actually, even on DOS we used WordPerfect 
to create a several hundred pages user manual for the CAD software 
company I was working for in the late '80s, early '90s.


Ralf



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[TK Chia]

Hello Ralf,


Still an excellent tool I consider TROFF, now GROFF, for Unix/Linux
-which also exists for Windows, appeared in 1990 (Version 0.3.1) by
James Clark) coming from  “a text-formatting program called RUNOFF,
which was written by Jerome H. Saltzer for MIT's CTSS operating system
in the mid-1960s!



I wouldn't touch any of that stuff with a barge pole these days. Either
LibreOffice Writer already fits the bill, or I would much rather use a
tool like Scribus these days...


troff (as groff) is still very much alive today, as far as I can tell.
And the troff format is still the default source format for man pages on
Linux.  It is quite a good format for the job, if you ask me.

Thank you!

--
https://gitlab.com/tkchia :: https://github.com/tkchia


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Ralf Quint]

On 4/23/2021 1:44 PM, Thomas Desi wrote:

Hi Ralf,

good to focus on the “whys”.

You said:

| “Nor would I do any graphics work in DOS, or any word
| processing these days.”

I did get into DOS because of “word processing”.

More precisely it is a text-processing tool(!) EVA.EXE which was developed by 
Primož Jakopin in the 1970ies and 80ies, ported to TOS on Atari, in the 1990ies 
to DOS and WINDOWS. I re-discovered it last year on his site and also got in 
good contact with him. He still is working on it...
I am not sure if that is any more efficient for at least 99.99% of all 
use cases then using LibreOfiice/OpenOffice Writer, Microsoft Word or 
WordPerfect on Windows or Linux GUI based systems.

Moreover, I am a German native and Primož Jakopin is from Slovenia. Especially 
the letter was a challenge in the past (ASCII code page) to get all diacritics 
right. This has changed since, using UTF-8, which has appeared in DOS via 
MinEd, Blocek ed. al.
But that is heavily dependent on those application, as anything but 
single byte ASCII variations aren't native to DOS...

Still an excellent tool I consider TROFF, now GROFF, for Unix/Linux -which also 
exists for Windows, appeared in 1990 (Version 0.3.1) by James Clark) coming 
from  “a text-formatting program called RUNOFF, which was written by Jerome H. 
Saltzer for MIT's CTSS operating system in the mid-1960s!
I wouldn't touch any of that stuff with a barge pole these days. Either 
LibreOffice Writer already fits the bill, or I would much rather use a 
tool like Scribus these days...

I am still wondering if there might be a comparable product like the 
“Raspberry” but for an architecture that allows for FreeDOS natively?


Yes, there are such products, unfortunately not for the same price point...

Ralf



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Hi Ralf,

good to focus on the “whys”. 

You said:

| “Nor would I do any graphics work in DOS, or any word 
| processing these days.”

I did get into DOS because of “word processing”.

More precisely it is a text-processing tool(!) EVA.EXE which was developed by 
Primož Jakopin in the 1970ies and 80ies, ported to TOS on Atari, in the 1990ies 
to DOS and WINDOWS. I re-discovered it last year on his site and also got in 
good contact with him. He still is working on it...

I am especially interested in how the MOUSE is used in this particular program.

1.) The cursor can be “bound” to the mouse pointer. Move around in your text 
without the need to click your cursor into the text, which makes literally 
thousands of clicks obsolete. (Ergonomy)

2.) The mouse buttons can be assigned (in the Windows version) with whatever 
function you want. In the DOS version, it is assigned to LEFT=Delete 
RIGHT=Insert which make sense in this editor.

I was researching the net and looking at many editors but never found this 
feature anywhere else. But in FreeDOS: Amazingly, the mouse  in VDE Editor for 
DOS behaves the same way (without assigning commands to the mouse buttons, 
however. - This can be achieved using Bret Johson’s excellent “MOUSKEYS”)

This singular feature makes me cope with the downsides of DOS but I have more 
reasons to use DOS. (I did already mention them in earlier Emails.)

Moreover, I am a German native and Primož Jakopin is from Slovenia. Especially 
the letter was a challenge in the past (ASCII code page) to get all diacritics 
right. This has changed since, using UTF-8, which has appeared in DOS via 
MinEd, Blocek ed. al.

And when it comes to “retro-computing”, it’s not all about hardware only.

Still an excellent tool I consider TROFF, now GROFF, for Unix/Linux -which also 
exists for Windows, appeared in 1990 (Version 0.3.1) by James Clark) coming 
from  “a text-formatting program called RUNOFF, which was written by Jerome H. 
Saltzer for MIT's CTSS operating system in the mid-1960s! 

If one focuses on text-processing, editing or “word processing” and looking at 
the development there is really little progress even possible.

I use the MARKDOWN syntax in FreeDOS which is very cool and can easily later be 
used for websites or printing when exported.
I am still wondering if there might be a comparable product like the 
“Raspberry” but for an architecture that allows for FreeDOS natively?

Regards, 
Thomas




___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Hi Ralf,

good to focus on the “whys”. 

You said:

| “Nor would I do any graphics work in DOS, or any word 
| processing these days.”

I did get into DOS because of “word processing”.

More precisely it is a text-processing tool(!) EVA.EXE which was developed by 
Primož Jakopin in the 1970ies and 80ies, ported to TOS on Atari, in the 1990ies 
to DOS and WINDOWS. I re-discovered it last year on his site and also got in 
good contact with him. He still is working on it...

I am especially interested in how the MOUSE is used in this particular program.

1.) The cursor can be “bound” to the mouse pointer. Move around in your text 
without the need to click your cursor into the text, which makes literally 
thousands of clicks obsolete. (Ergonomy)

2.) The mouse buttons can be assigned (in the Windows version) with whatever 
function you want.  In the DOS version, it is assigned to LEFT=Delete 
RIGHT=Insert which make sense in this editor.

I was researching the net and looking at many editors but never found this 
feature anywhere else. But in FreeDOS: Amazingly, the mouse  in VDE Editor for 
DOS behaves the same way (without assigning commands to the mouse buttons, 
however. - This can be achieved using Bret Johson’s excellent “MOUSKEYS”)

This singular feature makes me cope with the downsides of DOS but I have more 
reasons to use DOS. (I did already mention them in earlier Emails.)

Moreover, I am a German native and Primož Jakopin is from Slovenia. Especially 
the letter was a challenge in the past (ASCII code page) to get all diacritics 
right. This has changed since, using UTF-8, which has appeared in DOS via 
MinEd, Blocek ed. al.

And when it comes to “retro-computing”, it’s not all about hardware only.

Still an excellent tool I consider TROFF, now GROFF, for Unix/Linux -which also 
exists for Windows, appeared in 1990 (Version 0.3.1) by James Clark) coming 
from  “a text-formatting program called RUNOFF, which was written by Jerome H. 
Saltzer for MIT's CTSS operating system in the mid-1960s! 

If one focuses on text-processing, editing or “word processing” and looking at 
the development there is really little progress even possible.

I use the MARKDOWN syntax in FreeDOS which is very cool and can easily later be 
used for websites or printing when exported.
I am still wondering if there might be a comparable product like the 
“Raspberry” but for an architecture that allows for FreeDOS natively?

Regards, 
Thomas


> On Thu,20210422- week16, at 18:55, Ralf Quint  wrote:
> 
> On 4/22/2021 3:21 AM, Thomas Desi wrote:
>> There are many different reasons why people would want to install FreeDOS 
>> (if they get to know it).
>> „ Different" like in „different people“. The needs and equipments are 
>> different and the mixture of technical generations
>> should not restrain FreeDOS, IMHO, to „retro computing“ and nostalgia only. 
>> Nostalgia is very much ok and brings up new and other thoughts, too. But 
>> there is 2021, too.
>> I understand that there is a difference when installing on to Harddisk and 
>> booting, or just having a USB Stick and using it on top of Linux or Windows.
>> It depends, as I say, on what people want, and - what they could want if the 
>> just knew…
> Well, here I think lays a huge problem for us (the FreeDOS project), a lot of 
> people don't seem to know what they want. There are always a number of people 
> showing up at random times, who come up with all kinds of glorious ideas or 
> serious (in their eyes) complaints as what to add or change in FreeDOS. 
> Which, when looked at it at the baseline of those ideas, would result in a 
> second coming of Linux.
> These are a lot of times people that voice their grievances about how bad 
> Windows/Microsoft is, even if the only practical reason is that it seems to 
> be en vogue in certain circle to bash on Windows/Microsoft.
> Or there are those people that can't cope with the alleged complexity of 
> Linux, thinking of (Free)DOS as being their savior, but then requiring all 
> those complexities, which would result in something that is looking like just 
> another Linux. Or Windows. Or macOS...
> 
> It seems to be hard for some people to see that FreeDOS is indeed a lot more 
> retro than cutting edge. And that some things just are not a real fit for 
> FreeDOS. Like someone on the FB page recently suggesting that it would be 
> great to have a Apache/MySQL/PHP stack on FreeDOS. Without actually thinking 
> about or realizing that the very design of DOS makes such an endeavor rather 
> unfeasible...
> 
> How do I use FreeDOS? Well, not as an everyday tool. I certainly won't bother 
> to use the Internet (email, web browsing, etc) with it. Those are things that 
> I can do much easier,much more efficient in Linux or Windows. Nor would I do 
> any graphics work in DOS, or any word processing these days. Again, those 
> things can be done much better, with way more options, on any modern GUI 
> bases OS.
> 
> What I would like 

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Hi Thomas:


There are many different reasons why people would want to install FreeDOS (if 
they get to know it).


I had given up with DOS emulation in Linux. As I was unable to get an 
old serial peripheral working via USB. Then I had the use of an old 
32-bit PC, and it had a serial port! So I installed FreeDOS on it, and 
connected the peripheral to the serial port. And everything works fine! 
I download heart rate data to a USB stick. And I transfer that to my 
Linux PC. Using on that the old DOS software via the DOSBox emulator.



„ Different" like in „different people“. The needs and equipments are different 
and the mixture of technical generations
should not restrain FreeDOS, IMHO, to „retro computing“ and nostalgia only.


I find interesting the perspectives of our folk!


Nostalgia is very much ok and brings up new and other thoughts, too.


I used first BASIC, then Mac OS, and next MS-DOS.


Documentation for FreeDOS should include CAVEATS about what would be more 
complicated to achieve or maybe impossible at all. (See the discussion about 
cheap printers, the missing concept of „drivers“, the whole USB complex, the 
combination of old+ new hardware, ports … The importance of BIOS for FreeDOS...)


Perhaps you want to write a book?


I know that this is not the responsibility of those who keep FreeDOS alive and 
continue working on it, to provide such infos, tips, tricks and documentation. 
Maybe there are books about it out there, or concise info.


I learn as I go along, by trying to solve problems. This is like the 
worked exercises in maths-teaching.



But the whole tragedy with forums, blogs, lists is that valuable information is 
scattered.


I have listed incoming messages by Subject.


I  am saying this because I can’t spend too much time as a ordinary user going 
in circles to find out that my expectations, based on the consumer approach we 
now have, were wrong regarding DOS.


This forum is the News to me!


And I have seen e.g. Bret Johnson giving his advices on USB with great patience 
a couple of times repeating in short time. He did a great documentation on his 
USB utils, and Eric provided a List with other USB utils, so this seems a 
returning issue which could be summed up once and for a while on the website?


Go for it!


It is, no doubt, great to find out how things worked and are working in 
computing, but not everybody has the background and technical knowledge, or is 
willing to try to find out non trivial (historical) details.


If you want someone else to do everything for you, then pay for it, and 
install say Windows!



Could anyone recommend me some good, working documentation on the caveats, 
issues, impossible things, and „best practice models“ to use Freedos today?


Practical experience.
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Ralf Quint]

On 4/22/2021 3:21 AM, Thomas Desi wrote:

There are many different reasons why people would want to install FreeDOS (if 
they get to know it).
„ Different" like in „different people“. The needs and equipments are different 
and the mixture of technical generations
should not restrain FreeDOS, IMHO, to „retro computing“ and nostalgia only. 
Nostalgia is very much ok and brings up new and other thoughts, too. But there 
is 2021, too.
I understand that there is a difference when installing on to Harddisk and 
booting, or just having a USB Stick and using it on top of Linux or Windows.
It depends, as I say, on what people want, and - what they could want if the 
just knew…
Well, here I think lays a huge problem for us (the FreeDOS project), a 
lot of people don't seem to know what they want. There are always a 
number of people showing up at random times, who come up with all kinds 
of glorious ideas or serious (in their eyes) complaints as what to add 
or change in FreeDOS. Which, when looked at it at the baseline of those 
ideas, would result in a second coming of Linux.
These are a lot of times people that voice their grievances about how 
bad Windows/Microsoft is, even if the only practical reason is that it 
seems to be en vogue in certain circle to bash on Windows/Microsoft.
Or there are those people that can't cope with the alleged complexity of 
Linux, thinking of (Free)DOS as being their savior, but then requiring 
all those complexities, which would result in something that is looking 
like just another Linux. Or Windows. Or macOS...


It seems to be hard for some people to see that FreeDOS is indeed a lot 
more retro than cutting edge. And that some things just are not a real 
fit for FreeDOS. Like someone on the FB page recently suggesting that it 
would be great to have a Apache/MySQL/PHP stack on FreeDOS. Without 
actually thinking about or realizing that the very design of DOS makes 
such an endeavor rather unfeasible...


How do I use FreeDOS? Well, not as an everyday tool. I certainly won't 
bother to use the Internet (email, web browsing, etc) with it. Those are 
things that I can do much easier,much more efficient in Linux or 
Windows. Nor would I do any graphics work in DOS, or any word processing 
these days. Again, those things can be done much better, with way more 
options, on any modern GUI bases OS.


What I would like to do is however to do some retro computing, even if 
it is just "for fun", as it reminds me on how I got started with 
computers almost 45 years ago. And have seen them developing. I would 
like to use DOS on some SBC/maker projects where I could make use of a 
text based UI or a basic, proved, lightweight file system as is DOS with 
FAT. And that doesn't exclude certain embedded commercial/industrial 
applications as well, where DOS would introduce much less overhead than 
even the most trimmed down Linux can do. And where you can do 
development on such systems without having to deal with multi-megabyte 
tool chains and multitude of rabbit holes that lead into dependency hell...



Ralf


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jerome Shidel]

> On Apr 22, 2021, at 4:18 AM, Bryan Kilgallin  wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Jerome:
> 
> Thanks for your efforts.

Your welcome

Thanks
:-)

Jerome


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

There are many different reasons why people would want to install FreeDOS (if 
they get to know it).
„ Different" like in „different people“. The needs and equipments are different 
and the mixture of technical generations
should not restrain FreeDOS, IMHO, to „retro computing“ and nostalgia only. 
Nostalgia is very much ok and brings up new and other thoughts, too. But there 
is 2021, too.
I understand that there is a difference when installing on to Harddisk and 
booting, or just having a USB Stick and using it on top of Linux or Windows. 
It depends, as I say, on what people want, and - what they could want if the 
just knew…

Documentation for FreeDOS should include CAVEATS about what would be more 
complicated to achieve or maybe impossible at all. (See the discussion about 
cheap printers, the missing concept of „drivers“, the whole USB complex, the 
combination of old+ new hardware, ports … The importance of BIOS for FreeDOS...)

I know that this is not the responsibility of those who keep FreeDOS alive and 
continue working on it, to provide such infos, tips, tricks and documentation. 
Maybe there are books about it out there, or concise info. But the whole 
tragedy with forums, blogs, lists is that valuable information is scattered.

I  am saying this because I can’t spend too much time as a ordinary user going 
in circles to find out that my expectations, based on the consumer approach we 
now have, were wrong regarding DOS. And I have seen e.g. Bret Johnson giving 
his advices on USB with great patience a couple of times repeating in short 
time. He did a great documentation on his USB utils, and Eric provided a List 
with other USB utils, so this seems a returning issue which could be summed up 
once and for a while on the website?

It is, no doubt, great to find out how things worked and are working in 
computing, but not everybody has the background and technical knowledge, or is 
willing to try to find out non trivial (historical) details.

Could anyone recommend me some good, working documentation on the caveats, 
issues, impossible things, and „best practice models“ to use Freedos today? 
Could this be linked to the FreeDos site?
Included on the installation FreeDos CD/USB / liveCd. (By the way, I guess that 
when I use a USB external CD Drive this might be the problem that neither 1.2 
nor 1.3 could „find packages“ and exited…?) 

Regards, 
Thomas


> Am 22.04.2021 um 10:16 schrieb Bryan Kilgallin :
> 
> Thanks, Jerome:
> 
> Thanks for your efforts.
> 
>>> I agree that there should be documentation about how the
>>> install process works which can help you to push it a bit
>>> when it gets stuck at some point. Of course the documents
>>> should be available online, also outside the install disk.
>> Better documentation would be nice. But, I’ve only got so
>> much spare time.
> 
> I like documentation! As to whether or not I attempt something.
> -- 
> members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Thanks, Jerome:

Thanks for your efforts.


I agree that there should be documentation about how the
install process works which can help you to push it a bit
when it gets stuck at some point. Of course the documents
should be available online, also outside the install disk.


Better documentation would be nice. But, I’ve only got so
much spare time.


I like documentation! As to whether or not I attempt something.
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Ralf Quint]

On 4/19/2021 4:41 AM, Thomas Desi wrote:



On Sun,20210418- week15, at 22:33, Ralf Quint > wrote:


expect that you don't have to do a few things in a more manual way


This is correct; but it is for me also a learning process (=read: 
discovery etc.) in learning how the tools work technicall, more then 
we are used in the current consumer-oriented »click here« world.
I am/would be ready to walk that extra mile if I know its worth it/ if 
necessary to get somewhere.
Well, that is the basic issue, DOS is from a time where there always was 
a moderate need for learning was required, and by and large, that was 
working quite well. It is just that a lot of people in "the current 
consumer-oriented world" as you put it just have been stupidified beyond 
a reasonable point.


If someone isn't willing to reverse that process/change that way of to 
today's thinking, well, than DOS just isn't the right fit for that 
person... ;-)


Ralf



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Liam Proven]

On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 19:53, Tomas By  wrote:
>
>
> Just a comment, Open Genera 2.0 (not tried it):
>
> https://archive.org/details/OpenGenera

It is an absolutely fascinating OS and an important piece of history,
but it's not freeware or FOSS, it's not a native x86 OS and must run
on an emulator, and it is anything but simple! :-)

There are several Lisp OSs that I know of for x86 computers. One is a
largely stalled personal project:
https://common-lisp.net/project/movitz/

One was a proof of concept but got quite far:
https://github.com/mntmn/interim

The one that I am most excited by is the personal project of the lead
programmer of Tao Group's Taos and Intent/Elate:
https://github.com/vygr/ChrysaLisp

But none are beginner-friendly... Yet, anyway. :-)


-- 
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[TK Chia]

Hello Liam,


This is indeed interesting --- an OS that is fast and light, and knows
at least a few things about modern (21st-century) hardware and software
standards.



There are a _lot_ of choices out there that are not as bloated as
modern Linux tends to be, and not super-simple and limited like DOS
(any DOS).


In my opinion, the main problem with MS-DOS is not that it is
super-simple --- the main problem is that it is old (which is a somewhat
different thing).

Thank you!

--
https://gitlab.com/tkchia :: https://github.com/tkchia


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Tomas By]

On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 19:39:00 +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
> [...] I wrote an article for the Register about a decade back with 25
> alternative OSes for x86 machines
> https://www.theregister.com/Print/2013/11/01/25_alternative_pc_operating_systems/


Just a comment, Open Genera 2.0 (not tried it):

https://archive.org/details/OpenGenera

/Tomas


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Liam Proven]

On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 19:06, TK Chia  wrote:
>
> This is indeed interesting --- an OS that is fast and light, and knows
> at least a few things about modern (21st-century) hardware and software
> standards.

There are quite a few out there.

I wrote an article for the Register about a decade back with 25
alternative OSes for x86 machines
https://www.theregister.com/Print/2013/11/01/25_alternative_pc_operating_systems/

It mentions KolibriOS, and FreeDOS, and very slightly cheats with one
mention of a Linux remix, but it is a long-dead one now.

It doesn't even mention my current favourite, which is Oberon.
http://ignorethecode.net/blog/2009/04/22/oberon/

There are a _lot_ of choices out there that are not as bloated as
modern Linux tends to be, and not super-simple and limited like DOS
(any DOS).

-- 
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[TK Chia]

Hello Eric, hello Thomas,


PS: Thanks for mentioning https://kolibrios.org/de/download which
supports USB (mouse, keyboard, trackpad, storage) in only 1.5 MB.
Does it also support your printer and other USB devices? It does


This is indeed interesting --- an OS that is fast and light, and knows
at least a few things about modern (21st-century) hardware and software
standards.

I guess I overlooked it somehow earlier, probably because it is neither
on GitHub nor on GitLab.

Thank you!

--
https://gitlab.com/tkchia :: https://github.com/tkchia


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

> On Sun,20210418- week15, at 22:33, Ralf Quint  wrote:
> 
> expect that you don't have to do a few things in a more manual way 

This is correct; but it is for me also a learning process (=read: discovery 
etc.) in learning how the tools work technicall, more then we are used in the 
current consumer-oriented »click here« world.
I am/would be ready to walk that extra mile if I know its worth it/ if 
necessary to get somewhere.

Thomas___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

On Sun,20210418- week15, at 21:01, Eric Auer  wrote:
> 
> Keep me posted about your USB driver adventures :-)
will do. 
Some info I found here: http://www.bootdisk.com/usb.htm
-Th___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Felix Miata]

Bryan Kilgallin composed on 2021-04-19 09:51 (UTC+1000):

>> I define printer quality by whether it includes Epson directly or by 
>> emulation. I
>> don't buy Epson, because it only makes inkjet printers. I buy Brother lasers 
>> due
>> to speed, to decent Linux support, and to Epson FX-850 emulation available if
>> spending a bit more than bottom of the line.

> You use a Brother laser printer. So why do you need Epson ink-jet 
> capability?

Ralf provided a technically correct answer.

I don't know that the DOS software I use ever supported any inkjet printers. I 
was
still exclusively using Epson compatible dot matrix when the DOS software I 
still
use was discontinued without upgrade path. All my spreadsheet macros assume 
Epson.
I bought an inkjet once. The ink disappeared before I could print 40 pages from
the automatic self head cleaning that failed to clean enough to have all 4 
colors
working. They are a terrible choice for anyone like me who rarely prints 
anything.
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion,
based on faith, not based on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Ralf Quint]

On 4/18/2021 4:51 PM, Bryan Kilgallin wrote:

Felix:

I define printer quality by whether it includes Epson directly or by 
emulation. I
don't buy Epson, because it only makes inkjet printers. I buy Brother 
lasers due
to speed, to decent Linux support, and to Epson FX-850 emulation 
available if

spending a bit more than bottom of the line.


You use a Brother laser printer. So why do you need Epson ink-jet 
capability?


He wants Epson printer language capability (ESC/P, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESC/P) and he wants a laser printer.


As Epson doesn't produce laser printers, he has to use another 
manufacturer and apparently the Brother model that he is using does 
support ESC/P



Ralf


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Felix:


I define printer quality by whether it includes Epson directly or by emulation. 
I
don't buy Epson, because it only makes inkjet printers. I buy Brother lasers due
to speed, to decent Linux support, and to Epson FX-850 emulation available if
spending a bit more than bottom of the line.


You use a Brother laser printer. So why do you need Epson ink-jet 
capability?

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Felix Miata]

Eric Auer composed on 2021-04-18 12:27 (UTC+0200):

> But as said, I am optimistic: CPU power is cheap today and it is,
> still or again, a quality feature of printers to speak PS or PDF.

I define printer quality by whether it includes Epson directly or by emulation. 
I
don't buy Epson, because it only makes inkjet printers. I buy Brother lasers due
to speed, to decent Linux support, and to Epson FX-850 emulation available if
spending a bit more than bottom of the line.
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion,
is based on faith, not on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Ralf Quint]

On 4/18/2021 8:29 AM, Thomas Desi wrote:

• I never managed to install Freedos on a harddisk via the “live CD 
1.3” or 1.2 version (image). All of them just stopped in telling me “packages 
not found”. (For whatever reason. I gave up after some googleing and saw other 
people had encountered similar problems and said it is the BIOS and this and 
that... I stopped trying. It just takes too much time without a clear reason, 
what to do, uncertain result. - (Note: I tried on a “MSI” laptop, a Samsung 
“Netbook”, and an ITX Minicomputer) // I finally accomplished to install it on 
the ITX via USB stick (with the freedos1.2.img) on it. However, “fdimples” 
still is an enigma to me… it’s not available on that .img by calling it as a 
command. But I don’t think I need it.
As I mentioned before, this might be an issue in initial installer, 
which might be hard to test in all possible combinations/scenarios with 
the rather small number of active people on the project. But there would 
be ways around it...

• The USB “Problem”: has been discussed in the mailing list recently. 
Honestly I don’t consider it an advantage to FreeDos having to boot a linux 
system just to get to my DOS-.txt-files from the harddisk… (My ITX / 
Bios/Freedos lets me transfer files to/fro USB Stick when booted from stick. 
This is ok, so I can work with it, as startup time is very short. A couple of 
seconds only. But booting from C: should recognize a USB-Stick present at 
booting and be read/writeable.
Easier said than done. USB is a rather fickle beast which is much more 
complicated as people (specially plain users) seem generally understand. 
USB didn't really come out after DOS was declared as "End of Life" by 
Microsoft and that was the starting point in time for FreeDOS. And for 
an OS that is declared to be dying soon, you will find very little 
support from mainstream manufacturers to write supporting drivers for 
this. Specially as (Free)DOS doesn't really have a concept of "drivers", 
that always has been something for applications to deal with...

• Printing is still waiting -- haven’t had time to fiddle with that. It 
just didn’t work out of the box with my editors (LaserJet & Centronics cable). 
I have no hopes to make it work, really… maybe “someday”...
What kind of "LaserJet"? If it is a real one (not one of those 
"WinLasers" like HP-5L or HP-2020 or such), it should "just work". If it 
is a "WinLaser", well, then you are SOL, as in that case, it is the OS 
(Windows/macOS/Linux) that is doing all the heavy lifting of generating 
the printing data and the printer itself is rather "stupid" and just 
puts pixel on the paper as it is told by the OS. There simply is no way 
to do that in DOS...

• Codepage (UTF-8 support? Maybe not possible without a converter 
program? »Boček« Editor can save in UTF mode in DOS.)
Once again, UTF-8 is something that came out well after the age of DOS. 
There will never be UTF-8 support in DOS itself (there were a lot of 
hoops to jump through to get double-byte character sets like for 
Japanese or Chinese supported in a meaningful way), so again, it is up 
to an application to have knowledge about this...

• Whilst trying to make it work for my needs I get the feeling there is 
much discussion about technical (historical?) details, which might be of 
interest to some specialists. I get the idea that DOS (“Disk Operating System”) 
is a sealed book for the initiated and not for ordinary people. This doesn’t 
comfort me if I just want to save my files to a usb stick or print out on paper 
a letter, feeling completely stupid after years and years of computer use on 
all platforms. But, I am not a »coder« or tech.
No, not a "sealed book for the initiated", but a lot of people, like 
you, who have been using newer OS in the last 20+ years just don't seem 
to be able to easily put themselves back into a time and place where a 
lot of technology that people take for granted today simply didn't exist 
or was in its infancy.


6. Final thoughts
“We” (me, user-people) see a computer as an omnipresent “all-purpose” thing. 
The industry makes us believe that is has to be fun, easy to use, performative, 
stylish, multi-user, password-protected, videoconference-abled, netflixed, 
youtubed, musiced, telephoneed, typewritered, medical diagnosis machineed, 
internet deviced, and rocketed flying you to Mars … there is no end. Obviously 
this leads to the gigantomastia 12GB of Windows ed.al. and the daily 
update-itis. Size doesn’t matter much today, but it is overkill and a complete 
mess to a single person, also regarding privacy… Let’s not go into this here.
As I stated above, a lot of people take a lot of those things for 
granted these days, and then get all upset when being told "Sorry, that 
doesn't (easily) work (this way) in DOS".


FreeDos, on the other hand, could be a surprisingly worthy alternative for 
those who have only basic needs in computing - or very 

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Ralf Quint]

On 4/18/2021 9:27 AM, Eric Auer wrote:

Hi!


I never managed to install Freedos on a harddisk via the “live CD 1.3” or 1.2 
version (image).

There are two problems: 1. where the installer expects the packages
in terms of drive letters and 2. whether you can partition the disk
to create a primary LBA FAT partition, format it and make it bootable.

I am pretty sure that he ran into the very same issue that I mentioned 
on our last online meeting, which seems to me more like a logical error 
(on real iron rather than a VM). I just didn't get the time to come up 
with either a fix or an alternative installed (at least up to the point 
where FDIMPLES somes into play)...


Ralf



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jerome Shidel]

> On Apr 18, 2021, at 3:01 PM, Eric Auer  wrote:
> [..]
> I am looking forward to Jerome's next update with a tuned
> driver strategy. FDISK would not help with that.

RC4 is coming very very soon. 

The new RBE is done. Currently, testing and fixing minor
issues with release media builds that were caused by 
me changing stuff. Things like—Oh, since it builds the
boot disk image from a package list and not based on
tweaking some other disk image. I needed to add the 
HIMEM package to the list and rebuild the release.

Just a bunch of little fiddly bits. :-)

> I agree that there should be documentation about how the
> install process works which can help you to push it a bit
> when it gets stuck at some point. Of course the documents
> should be available online, also outside the install disk.

Better documentation would be nice. But, I’ve only got so 
much spare time. :-)

On the bright side… It says “packages not found.” Instead of
those wonderful modern error messages like “iTunes Store Error (-232342)” or
those good old DOS errors like “runtime error 204 at 31fa:1100”

I always found those so very informative. not. :-)

> [..]
> You are of course right that creating a dual boot system
> is tricky. In particular, it is not something the FreeDOS
> installer can do for you. So depending on how much you want
> it, we could write some howto about how to create a dual
> boot system with Linux (or Windows) or even a triple boot,
> using tools for Linux or Windows. DOS tools are not enough
> to do dual boot with anything without the help of the Linux
> or Windows system itself. So you have to use their tools.

Like when installing Windows... By default, the installer configures 
the system to boot FreeDOS. Leaving other operating systems
not very accessible. It does make backup copies of the MBR. So,
a knowledgeable user could possibly use those to restore booting to 
the previous OS. However, that is still risky, complicated and I don’t really 
recommend doing that.

If a user intends to install on real hardware, has a prior OS they want 
to keep and intends on multi-boot, they should not run the installer in
default mode. They should run it in advanced mode. (quit, and restart
the installer with “setup adv”) Or, switch from default to advanced mode
by pressing CTRL+C when the installer is waiting for user input. 

In advanced mode, things like selecting the target drive and install path,
overwriting the boot loader, transferring system files and other options 
are available. In advanced mode, the installer pre-selects the settings
it would make for you. However, you can change them if needed.

:-)

Jerome





___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Eric Auer]

Hi Thomas,

indeed A: and B: are reserved for floppy drives. The rest
is for partitions found at boot and after that, drives
accessed by drivers can be added. So if you do not see
the USB stick after booting from harddisk, it probably
just means that the USB driver does not work. As said,
it can help to boot from USB to get BIOS-assisted USB
stick access.

If I understand the mails correctly, not finding packages
during install is caused by unsuccesfully switching from
BIOS-assisted to DOS-only CD/DVD drivers at some point, so
I am looking forward to Jerome's next update with a tuned
driver strategy. FDISK would not help with that.

I agree that there should be documentation about how the
install process works which can help you to push it a bit
when it gets stuck at some point. Of course the documents
should be available online, also outside the install disk.

> I could even take a photo from the screen instructions...

It is probably better to just look at the steps in a browser
on another PC or in the smartphone instead of having to use
a photo of the instructions.

You are of course right that creating a dual boot system
is tricky. In particular, it is not something the FreeDOS
installer can do for you. So depending on how much you want
it, we could write some howto about how to create a dual
boot system with Linux (or Windows) or even a triple boot,
using tools for Linux or Windows. DOS tools are not enough
to do dual boot with anything without the help of the Linux
or Windows system itself. So you have to use their tools.

Keep me posted about your USB driver adventures :-)

Regards, Eric



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Hi Eric, thanks for the in-depth responses!

Drive letters:

> On Sun,20210418- week15, at 18:27, Eric Auer  wrote:
> 
> There are two problems: 1. where the installer expects the packages
> in terms of drive letters 

Yes, this was the problem. However, I don’t know anything technical about all 
this, but I remember:

A:

B:

used to be floppy drives (I have none inbuilt in my itx, and haven't seen 
inbuilt floppy drives for a while...)


C: to me is known as the main drive (windows...!) 

D: showed as another USB stick (if present)

When I booted from the  USB-CDrom drive (with the freedos image on it), it has 
no letter assigned (right? - I think FreeDOS even prints it)

—> couldn’t a letter be assigned by the »system« itself or (better?): why would 
it need a letter at all (?excuse my illiteracy on all of this, just guessing 
wildly), can’t the installer reference to its »own location« and find the 
packages which are all just next to the installer on the same disc?

And … if the installer tells me bluntly »packages not found« - this doesn’t 
help me as a user at all. 

Instead, if that instruction message would say: »Go back to DOS and type 
»fdisk«" (or whatever command it needs, like a very short how-to-do 
instruction,) 
- or BETTER
give a hint to a helpful »readme.txt« on the installer CDrom what to do if 
something goes wrong with the drive letters and it can’t find the packages, 
next in order to install FreeDOS … I could have helped myself out of it. 
I could even take a photo from the screen instructions with my Smartphone and 
follow the steps if they are to long to memorize, or copy on paper the 
commands. Better than nothing! (Excuses for my naivité!)

This is what I ment by saying »for the initiated« : once you KNOW, it seems 
hard to understand how another person can't do it… 
(I just rewatched Jim Halls video https://youtu.be/On5eZdDGsCo on this, which 
gives a good intro, but only if the packages are found… :D - also the resizing 
of the partition to 240MB isn’t a widespread knowledge...)

I don’t cosider formatting and partitioning a hd a trivial thing to do, 
especially given the presence of another OS. (And if there is a »dual boot« , 
i.e. I could choose to re-activate the other OS.) – By the way, on my ITX was a 
Windows 7 professionel installed which I finally  (willfully?) erased 
installing FreeDOS from the USB image. That is ok so far, unless I don’t want 
the Win7 back

Thank you for the instructions, Eric, to have a better USB approach. Bret 
Johnson responded helpfully how USB on DOS could work, too. -

Regards, Thomas  

___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Eric Auer]

Hello Jerome,

> Without functioning support for the the CD/DVD drive, the CD should
> still boot. That is not handled by a CD/DVD driver in FreeDOS.

This gives you at least two possibilities:

1. Use the ELTORITO driver for BIOS-assisted access to the CD/DVD
drive. It only works after booting from the CD, but that is perfect
for installation purposes and has been used in most older DOS ISO.

2. Make the bootable disk image on the CD of "harddisk" type, so
it contains the entire set of files needed for installation. As
far as I remember, this is what our USB boot image already does.

The disadvantage of 1. is that people might be disappointed that
CD/DVD access works while installing but not for the installed DOS
itself when you later boot from the harddisk or SSD of your computer.

The disadvantage of 2. is that it is annoying to have all files
wrapped inside another layer of packaging, the disk image. When
the boot CD only has a minimal bootable floppy image and all the
other files are in plain view on the ISO9660 part of the CD/DVD,
it is easier for people to help themselves to some files which
they would like to access at other moments, beyond installation.

Also, 2. requires you to have enough RAM to fit the entire
virtual install disk in RAM, which makes the combination of
a "full" install CD/DVD with many packages and an "old" PC
with less than 100 MB of RAM problematic. But for those, you
can still provide classic-style install CD/DVD instead which
have improved chances to find CD/DVD drivers for THAT hardware.

> It is handled through the system BIOS and (depending on which CD)
> also SYSLINUX/MEMDISK. Once the CD has booted, the installer...

...can always access at least the MEMDISK part. So by moving all
package files into the image, you can make sure that you always
have access to the files while installing. Solution 2 suggested
above. But with the mentioned caveats.

I personally recommend solution 1, as that has apparently worked
okay for a number of our older distro releases: ELTORITO.SYS :-)

> I am not aware of any utilities to support such things under FreeDOS.

About GPT: It would be sufficient if the kernel supports it to
be able to deal with FAT partitions on GPT disks. Of course you
would also want a GPT-aware FDISK at some point and probably
GPT-aware USB drivers, but most utilities in DOS do not even
know about the existence of the concept of partitions at all,
so they would not care which style of partitions you use :-)

> RC4 is only days away. It uses a different method when attempting
> to initialize the CD/DVD ROM. It will attempt using several drivers.

Cool :-) Thanks!

Eric



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jerome Shidel]

Hello, 

> On Apr 18, 2021, at 12:27 PM, Eric Auer  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi!
> 
>> I never managed to install Freedos on a harddisk via the “live CD 1.3” or 
>> 1.2 version (image).
> 
> There are two problems: 1. where the installer expects the packages
> in terms of drive letters and 2. whether you can partition the disk
> to create a primary LBA FAT partition, format it and make it bootable.

The installer does not care what drive letter has the packages.

It checks all possible drive letters in an attempt to locate the packages 
needed for installation.

> 
> 
>> a working install ( I still have no idea what I did wrong that Freedos
>> 1.3. live, and Freedos 1.2 standard CDs never worked for me
> 
> Even that is a bit complicated. DOS used to be rather "manual" in both
> use and install. So I would be okay with getting dropped to a prompt on
> booting from CD or USB and then having to use FDISK, FORMAT, SYS, COPY
> and similar commands to kick DOS to a built-in harddisk, SSD or eMMC.
> 
> Understandably, the installer tries to make that easier, but fails to
> cover enough possible situations in which it could end up. For example,
> Linux installers are able to find and resize existing Windows installs
> on MBR or GPT partitioned disks to share your computer between Windows
> and Linux without breaking the existing Windows. The installer simply
> asks whether it should keep or delete Windows and everything else will
> happen automatically. That would be way beyond the abilities of FreeDOS.

This does not appear to be related to his problem installing 1.2 or 1.3-RC4.

He said …

>>  • I never managed to install Freedos on a harddisk via the “live CD 
>> 1.3” or 1.2 version (image). All of them just stopped in telling me 
>> “packages not found”.


There is only one reason for that message. The installer could not locate the 
packages. 

That primarily happens when the CD/DVD driver was unable to initialize the 
CD/DVD-ROM drive for whatever reason. 

Without functioning support for the the CD/DVD drive, the CD should still boot. 
That is not handled by a CD/DVD driver in FreeDOS. It is handled through the 
system BIOS and (depending on which CD) also SYSLINUX/MEMDISK. Once the CD has 
booted, the installer should be able to partition and format the hard drive. 
However, the installer requires access to the remainder of the CD-ROM to 
install the packages. So, It can proceed no further than those steps without 
the CD/DVD driver supporting them.

Also…

Things like resizing partitions and GPT support aren’t actually an issue with 
the installer.  I am not aware of any utilities to support such things under 
FreeDOS. If and when they become available, they might be added to the list of 
utilities employed by the installer to include such functionality during the 
install process. 

On a side note…

RC4 is only days away. It uses a different method when attempting to initialize 
the CD/DVD ROM. It will attempt using several drivers. RC4 also includes the 
Floppy Edition. The Floppy Edition uses a completely different installer and 
does not require CD/DVD support.

Jerome




___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Eric Auer]

Hi!

> I never managed to install Freedos on a harddisk via the “live CD 1.3” or 1.2 
> version (image).

There are two problems: 1. where the installer expects the packages
in terms of drive letters and 2. whether you can partition the disk
to create a primary LBA FAT partition, format it and make it bootable.

Assuming that DOS is reasonably simple, you could do things manually
when the installer fails to do them automatically, so the second one
is the more interesting question. There are FDISK and XFDISK and other
tools, in various versions. Recently, there was a discussion in the
BTTR DOS forum which resulted in fixing some FDISK bugs, but I do not
know whether FreeDOS 1.2 or 1.3 already has the corresponding update?
You could also use Linux with GPARTED to comfortably do partitioning.

> The USB “Problem”: has been discussed in the mailing list recently.
> Honestly I don’t consider it an advantage to FreeDos having to boot
> a linux system just to get to my DOS-.txt-files from the harddisk

In theory, you can often gain access to USB sticks in DOS context by
booting from that stick itself. Because some extra BIOS support will
be active in that context. Required tools: A bootable DOS on a stick.
Not sure how far your attempts in that direction have gone so far?

> Printing is still waiting -- haven’t had time to fiddle with that.
> It just didn’t work out of the box with my editors (LaserJet & Centronics

Such printers do have a tendency to still understand plain text, but
you could try whether something like "COPY testfile.ps LPT1" (or the
same with a PDF) works for your printer. If yes, you can reduce the
problem to having to convert your text to PS or PDF first, which can
be done with suitable DOS apps.

> Codepage (UTF-8 support? Maybe not possible without a converter program?
> »Boček« Editor can save in UTF mode in DOS.) 

As you already saw, DOS normally only supports 256 character codepages.
There are tricks for 512 characters on VGA, but everything above that
requires graphics mode which text editors for DOS rarely use. You will
have noticed that Blocek indeed uses graphics mode :-)

Of course it is a bit annoying when you have German Unicode text which
actually uses less than 256 different characters and most DOS apps still
fail to display it properly. This is because they all assume that each
character is exactly 1 byte "long". As work-around, you can convert the
files back and forth before and after editing or viewing: Tools such as
RECODE have been ported to DOS. Also, drivers for long file names in DOS
have various codepage settings which help you with non-ASCII file names.

> Whilst trying to make it work for my needs I get the feeling there is
> much discussion about technical (historical?) details, which might be
> of interest to some specialists.

Yeah but it depends on the mood of the community at specific times :-)

> I get the idea that DOS (“Disk Operating System”) is a sealed book for
> the initiated and not for ordinary people. This doesn’t comfort me...

The nice thing about DOS is that it HAS been very popular decades ago,
so you can still find tutorials for many things online. Of course you
can also ask here explicitly, but notice how I got criticized this week
for explaining something which is considered to be "too well known" so
you need some patience and explicitly state your needs until you get
the replies adjusted to your preferred knowledge level :-)

> if I just want to save my files to a usb stick or print out on paper
> a letter, feeling completely stupid after years and years...

The stupid part is not you. The problem is that neither USB nor the
current generation of printers have existed when DOS was young, so
we all have to use creative solutions on modern systems for things
in DOS which may look simple for Windows 10 or a modern Linux. That
is the downside of keeping DOS deliberately simple and less PnP etc.

For example I remember installing a very old Linux 2.0 on a PC with
only 16 MB RAM, some of which was shared with the graphics. It worked
reasonably back then but would find neither USB nor LAN on a 2021 PC.

Also, I think that so far my hardware failures have been limited to
a graphics card, power supply, CPU fan and some disks. Luckily, all
failures have stayed limited to the respective component and even in
the disk cases, thanks to SMART (even DOS apps available for that) I
was able to replace the disks before larger amounts of data got lost.

> what you CAN’T do with it. (See the questions about sound, viewers, video, 
> graphics)

That is a bit complicated. If you have one app which plays video with
sound on modern hardware at high resolution, you could say you CAN do
that. But basically all old games will be the same old low resolution
as in the past and, having no ISA sound card any more, limited to the
PC speaker/beeper unless you use creative solutions or run DOS inside
something else which in turn does have drivers for your modern sound.

> a 

[Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

FreeDOS for Dummies?


(NB. This is a short sum-up of my (brief) encounter and experience with 
FreeDos, as from a user perspective (in contrast to a “tech” person, like a 
programer or computer technician etc. I like to continue my experience.)

1. I always had a prejudice against MS-DOS because of “M$” or/and because I 
thought it is a system with too few commands, compared to the UNIX set. - And, 
obviously I considered it completely obsolete.

2. This said I wouldn’t have tried it or installed it without a certain editor 
in mind I discovered was for DOS, but not working in the Command-line app 
(neither in Win10,WinXp, Win7). This is where FreeDos came in.

3. I was surprised that FreeDos was not “abandon-ware” (!) but actively 
developed and maintained and has a Mailing-List. Which is active. I came in, 
when the “Stallman-flame-war” was heating up… Anyway, I have since had good and 
helpful replies from many people who have a great knowledge of intricate 
technical questions.

4. Some downsides, so far: 
• I never managed to install Freedos on a harddisk via the “live CD 
1.3” or 1.2 version (image). All of them just stopped in telling me “packages 
not found”. (For whatever reason. I gave up after some googleing and saw other 
people had encountered similar problems and said it is the BIOS and this and 
that... I stopped trying. It just takes too much time without a clear reason, 
what to do, uncertain result. - (Note: I tried on a “MSI” laptop, a Samsung 
“Netbook”, and an ITX Minicomputer) // I finally accomplished to install it on 
the ITX via USB stick (with the freedos1.2.img) on it. However, “fdimples” 
still is an enigma to me… it’s not available on that .img by calling it as a 
command. But I don’t think I need it.
• The USB “Problem”: has been discussed in the mailing list recently. 
Honestly I don’t consider it an advantage to FreeDos having to boot a linux 
system just to get to my DOS-.txt-files from the harddisk… (My ITX / 
Bios/Freedos lets me transfer files to/fro USB Stick when booted from stick. 
This is ok, so I can work with it, as startup time is very short. A couple of 
seconds only. But booting from C: should recognize a USB-Stick present at 
booting and be read/writeable. 
• Printing is still waiting -- haven’t had time to fiddle with that. It 
just didn’t work out of the box with my editors (LaserJet & Centronics cable). 
I have no hopes to make it work, really… maybe “someday”...
• Codepage (UTF-8 support? Maybe not possible without a converter 
program? »Boček« Editor can save in UTF mode in DOS.) 
• Whilst trying to make it work for my needs I get the feeling there is 
much discussion about technical (historical?) details, which might be of 
interest to some specialists. I get the idea that DOS (“Disk Operating System”) 
is a sealed book for the initiated and not for ordinary people. This doesn’t 
comfort me if I just want to save my files to a usb stick or print out on paper 
a letter, feeling completely stupid after years and years of computer use on 
all platforms. But, I am not a »coder« or tech.

5. Advantages IMHO: All what has been said in the “Why do you use DOS?”-thread 
- and more!


6. Final thoughts
“We” (me, user-people) see a computer as an omnipresent “all-purpose” thing. 
The industry makes us believe that is has to be fun, easy to use, performative, 
stylish, multi-user, password-protected, videoconference-abled, netflixed, 
youtubed, musiced, telephoneed, typewritered, medical diagnosis machineed, 
internet deviced, and rocketed flying you to Mars … there is no end. Obviously 
this leads to the gigantomastia 12GB of Windows ed.al. and the daily 
update-itis. Size doesn’t matter much today, but it is overkill and a complete 
mess to a single person, also regarding privacy… Let’s not go into this here. 

FreeDos, on the other hand, could be a surprisingly worthy alternative for 
those who have only basic needs in computing - or very specialized ones (which 
could be realized with the DOS means). Lean as in “vegetarian steak”, 
comprehensible in it’s logic as a computer system, stable (I guess), and - 
lean. (Again. This time: Fast)
Maybe I am too much of a purist, minimalist or so, - but I am VERY HAPPY if I 
CANNOT and DON’T NEED to tweak anything when I don’t need to choose fonts, 
sizes, colours etc. It is great with its minimal set of rules (=commands). It 
has been thought through, I accept it and work with it. Just start being 
productive. 
No internet browsing, no checking emails, no whatsappdesktop, no whatever 
networking, no virus, no commercials, no tracking, no listenings to music, no 
ordering unnecessary stuff from amazon, no watching 3 videos at the same time. 
(Anyway most people have Smartphones and Tablets to do all this!)

So there IS a purpose for DOS / FreeDos today which is more than 
“retrocomputing” or nostalgia or a “sign of age”. Pure Z.E.N. 
And by the way: WHY NOT a