Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hello everyone! I am blown away, in the most positive sense of the word, by the fruitful discussion my original post seems to have sparked, or rekindled. For this discussion to have its heated moments is only natural as emotions, passions and frustrations are involved. If there is one point of constructive criticism I would like to make, it is to draw attention to the fact that some remarks have ranked rather high on my personal confrontational scale. While this does not render these remarks false in any way, they might come across as intimidating or, depending on personal associations, eristic. I want to appeal to all of us, explicitly including myself, if we feel we need to correct someone, to always do so gently and charitably. Here's to the accessibility of FreeDOS, and to tomes full of knowledge rather than dictionaries of limitations. Best, Felix Am Fr., 20. März 2020 um 11:01 Uhr schrieb Eric Auer : > > > Hi Mateusz, hi speech experts, > > >> DJGPP is a complete 32-bit C/C++ development system for Intel > >> 80386 (and higher) PCs running DOS. > > > I am saying that DOS is a 16-bit, real-time operating system. You say > > that DJGPP is more powerful. Yes, but DJGPP is not DOS. Then of course, > > one could imagine a 32-bit DOS-like system with 386 memory management, > > protected mode etc but it simply would not be called DOS. > > Actually the FD32 project is or was about running the DOS kernel > in protected mode, but the performance gains were small. I have > used DJGPP myself for tasks where I wanted many megabytes of RAM > directly available and of course you do notice that DOS will not > do anything in the background. So for example I buffered file I/O > during busy periods and only called DOS to write data files later > when it did not disturb me that I had to wait until DOS was done. > > So I would say if you only need real-time at moments without DOS > kernel (or BIOS) interaction and if you need much RAM directly > available without the hassles of EMS or XMS, then DJGPP is nice! > > About the feasibility of speech synthesis in DOS: If you use the > SoundBlaster AWE, you can load samples into the RAM of the sound > card and "play" speech like an instrument :-) Games usually take > either the protected mode or EMS (or XMS) route to access their > sample library. The PC speaker speech TSR contains a few dozen, > of course low quality, phoneme samples in only tens of kB RAM. > > So yes, it can be done, but which modern computer can still be > connected to a SoundBlaster? You would have to use HDA / AC97. > Which a few modern DOS media players are actually able to use. > > In short, I think it is feasible to do this. But remember that > games are very different from a screen reader TSR which has to > run in the background without disturbing normal DOS usage. This > would be pretty hard but still feasible. On the other hand, it > just is a lot easier to run DOS in dosemu or a VM and make use > of sound drivers, speech synthesizers and infrastructure running > on the host operating system with all fancy multitasking and 32 > or 64 bit memory and disk management features readily available. > > Many speech synth and screen reader software packages for DOS and > other systems have been named in this thread, so I would be glad > to hear more about features and requirements of those which have > a free license. Maybe somebody could publish a howto for using > them with FreeDOS, either on raw hardware or in a VM or dosemu? > > Thanks :-) Exiting to have such featurs for DOS! > > Regards, Eric > > PS: auersoft.eu is down at the moment due to an IP address > change, let me know if you want to help fixing that ;-) > > > > ___ > 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] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
On 20/03/2020 11:00, Eric Auer wrote:
So I would say if you only need real-time at moments without DOS
kernel (or BIOS) interaction and if you need much RAM directly
available without the hassles of EMS or XMS, then DJGPP is nice!
DJGPP is nice, without question. But here we are talking about a TSR
that would need to run in parallel of both DOS and another (real mode or
not) game or application without disturbing it, while synthesizing
speech at the same time.
In short, I think it is feasible to do this. But remember that
games are very different from a screen reader TSR which has to
run in the background without disturbing normal DOS usage.
Exactly right.
This would be pretty hard but still feasible.
That is why I was saying "unrealistic". Not "impossible".
Many speech synth and screen reader software packages for DOS and
other systems have been named in this thread, so I would be glad
to hear more about features and requirements of those which have
a free license.
I looked at 3 of them: JAWS, ASAP and PROVOX.
JAWS and ASAP are both "freeware for personal use, no sources". In both
cases the subject of distribution rights is unclear. PROVOX is released
under the GPL2 license, so no doubts there. I made a package for PROVOX,
that is included in my own distribution (Svarog386), it can be imported
into FreeDOS as well:
http://svarog386.sourceforge.net/repos/drivers/provox.zip
Maybe somebody could publish a howto for using
them with FreeDOS, either on raw hardware or in a VM or dosemu?
Step one: load the PROVOX TSR (type "PROVOX")
Step two: activate correct synth output ("PV BNS" for Braille 'n Speak)
That's as simple as that, it talks immediately. Of course there is a
huge amount of options, hotkeys and so on if one wants to use it really
seriously. All is described (as you know) in the PROVOX manual.
The VM scenario is something I described on the emubns page along with a
ready-to-use QEMU image: http://emubns.sourceforge.net
Mateusz
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hi Mateusz, hi speech experts, >> DJGPP is a complete 32-bit C/C++ development system for Intel >> 80386 (and higher) PCs running DOS. > I am saying that DOS is a 16-bit, real-time operating system. You say > that DJGPP is more powerful. Yes, but DJGPP is not DOS. Then of course, > one could imagine a 32-bit DOS-like system with 386 memory management, > protected mode etc but it simply would not be called DOS. Actually the FD32 project is or was about running the DOS kernel in protected mode, but the performance gains were small. I have used DJGPP myself for tasks where I wanted many megabytes of RAM directly available and of course you do notice that DOS will not do anything in the background. So for example I buffered file I/O during busy periods and only called DOS to write data files later when it did not disturb me that I had to wait until DOS was done. So I would say if you only need real-time at moments without DOS kernel (or BIOS) interaction and if you need much RAM directly available without the hassles of EMS or XMS, then DJGPP is nice! About the feasibility of speech synthesis in DOS: If you use the SoundBlaster AWE, you can load samples into the RAM of the sound card and "play" speech like an instrument :-) Games usually take either the protected mode or EMS (or XMS) route to access their sample library. The PC speaker speech TSR contains a few dozen, of course low quality, phoneme samples in only tens of kB RAM. So yes, it can be done, but which modern computer can still be connected to a SoundBlaster? You would have to use HDA / AC97. Which a few modern DOS media players are actually able to use. In short, I think it is feasible to do this. But remember that games are very different from a screen reader TSR which has to run in the background without disturbing normal DOS usage. This would be pretty hard but still feasible. On the other hand, it just is a lot easier to run DOS in dosemu or a VM and make use of sound drivers, speech synthesizers and infrastructure running on the host operating system with all fancy multitasking and 32 or 64 bit memory and disk management features readily available. Many speech synth and screen reader software packages for DOS and other systems have been named in this thread, so I would be glad to hear more about features and requirements of those which have a free license. Maybe somebody could publish a howto for using them with FreeDOS, either on raw hardware or in a VM or dosemu? Thanks :-) Exiting to have such featurs for DOS! Regards, Eric PS: auersoft.eu is down at the moment due to an IP address change, let me know if you want to help fixing that ;-) ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hello Karen, I will try to keep it on topic. On 20/03/2020 06:03, Karen Lewellen wrote: DJGPP is a complete 32-bit C/C++ development system for Intel 80386 (and higher) PCs running DOS. I am saying that DOS is a 16-bit, real-time operating system. You say that DJGPP is more powerful. Yes, but DJGPP is not DOS. Then of course, one could imagine a 32-bit DOS-like system with 386 memory management, protected mode etc but it simply would not be called DOS. It would be called reactOS, Windows, Linux, or anything else. unrealistic to expect performing any kind of native voice synthesis in such configuration. According to whom? it is one thing to claim, that you do not know how something is done, quite another to state something is unrealistic. Proper speech synthesis through a SoundBlaster card in real mode DOS, within a TSR or driver that takes no more than a couple of KB or RAM while keeping compatibility with existing software? Yes, I am sorry to insist, but this is technically unrealistic and no amount of motivational talk will change that. Now of course speech synthesis in some limited way is possible on poor hardware, efforts were done even on machines like the ATARI 800XL, but the resulting quality was disputable, at best. Years ago I even played with some DOS tool that was attempting synth speech over PC Speaker, but to be honest I was unable to understand a word of it. I'd be glad if you proved me wrong, though. I realize you mean no dishonor, but have you any idea how often I am told it is unrealistic technically for me to use a computer...at all? That is a feat I am most amazed about, but that's not the point. Human limitations are often misunderstood. It is much easier to understand limitations of machines and software designs, that is why the example you cite is not exactly relevant. Mateusz, there are screen readers that talk to internal cards. to soundblaster adapters, to USB devices Under real mode DOS? Could you share some links or names of commercial products that achieved that? I'd be keen to know more about them. after all scientists have been solving this problem since the 60's. DOS has been designed in the 80's, and it is condemned to stay there for the sake of retro compatibility. Your personal effort, while certainly appreciated does not make you an expert. I am definitely not an expert in the field of blind-related activities indeed. That is a field that I find highly interesting, but my practical knowledge is non-existent. That being said, I like to think that I know a thing or two about DOS and x86 architectures, including a more or less accurate idea of what can or cannot be done. Individuals pay thousands for the ability to read write and communicate, buying synthesizers, and software practically daily, even if their ultimate goal is not achieved. I am not disputing that. I am only saying that I find it unlikely that one would invest any amount of money for the only sake of playing an old game on an ancient system, while free ways exist to achieve the same. Now of course if one wants to buy an external synth and setup an old PC dedicated to DOS - more power to them. But there is a choice, and I believe choice is essential. You mean the way Joseph integrated ASAP which has several prospects for speech, including a generic driver created to work in case one has none of the synthesizers listed? Yes. That's the very same way I found to be optimal after my own research, and that I implemented in the solution I presented in another message on this list about "Talking DOS", with the difference that I used a synth emulator that I wrote myself. I also relied on open source QEMU instead of using the non-free VMWare Player. Incorporated after Joseph asked permission, which sort of skips past the licensing factor? While I am happy it fulfills Joseph's need, it does not skip past the licensing factor as far as FreeDOS is concerned, sorry. But, if permission is obtained, which Joseph did, one can use another tool. meaning licensing compatibility is no reason to limit options. True from the point of view of an individual, yes. But that won't work for FreeDOS, as the license exception obtained by Joseph does not include the 3 liberties that are at heart of the FreeDOS project. Actually, it works fine when used as designed. My guess from your efforts is you were not using it as designed. PROVOX works very well indeed, yes. Turns out the problem I had was not related to PROVOX at all, but to a wonky RS 232 support within VirtualBox. This is the reason why I dropped VirtualBox and switched to QEMU. Why use Jaws when joseph has proven you can get permission to use asap? As far as I understand, this permission does not include permission for repackaging, unlimited distribution, access to source code and publication of own changes to the software. clearly it works as joseph
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Mateusz Comments in context. On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Mateusz Viste wrote: FreeDOS, like other flavors of DOS, is a 16-bit, real-mode operating system. This means it runs within an extremely constrained environment: typically with access to a maximum of 640 kilobytes of memory, one taks at a time, and being able to address objects no bigger than 64 kilobytes. indeed? DJGPP is a complete 32-bit C/C++ development system for Intel 80386 (and higher) PCs running DOS. It includes ports of many GNU development utilities. The development tools require a 80386 or newer computer to run, as do the programs they produce. In most cases, the programs it produces can be sold commercially without license or royalties. anyway, you were saying? It is technically unrealistic to expect performing any kind of native voice synthesis in such configuration. According to whom? it is one thing to claim, that you do not know how something is done, quite another to state something is unrealistic. I realize you mean no dishonor, but have you any idea how often I am told it is unrealistic technically for me to use a computer...at all? Felix if memory serves is a software engineer, I imagine more than once he has been in a comparative situation. I read recently of an astro-physicist in the UK who identifies as blind..a profession likely rich with what some consider technically unrealistic. The only realistic way would be to output text through a hardware port, like the RS-232, and let an external device do the sound generation. And that's exactly what screen readers do already. But it means of course that one must have an extra hardware synthesizer, According to whom? Mateusz, there are screen readers that talk to internal cards. to soundblaster adapters, to USB devices, and as Joseph illustrated, to emulators. Please do not write a dictionary of limitation for other people, based on your personal week of effort. after all scientists have been solving this problem since the 60's. Your personal effort, while certainly appreciated does not make you an expert. Speak of what you personally do not know, without projecting that lack of knowledge onto the prospects as a whole. Makes me wonder what the djgpp team would say about posibilities. After all apple microsoft google even the Rasbery pi project proves every single day that there is a market, since all of these companies have products incorporating speech synthsis and screen readers. which may or may not be an acceptable investment, depending on the ultimate goal. Are you kidding? Again, I realize you are absolutely not leading from the place of personal experience, which is why I keep using the word personal, hoping you will choose your words carefully in future. Individuals pay thousands for the ability to read write and communicate, buying synthesizers, and software practically daily, even if their ultimate goal is not achieved. those stuck in windows for example, hoping to reclaim the eas that DOS simplicity gave them. I have a synthesizer on my desk that when i got it the first time cost $5,500. Granted it also scans the printed word letting me read most anything at any time and transfer that into wordperfect for DOS. I first got one in the 90's and there is still a company who repairs them to this day. I have only needed to replace it twice, both times due to another person not following my requests. My last replacement, about three years ago cost me less than many a cellphone. When I worked for Xerox years ago, part of my task was sitting with people from all walks of life and helping them match their goals with technology. I never once told anyone what was technically impossible based on my personal experiences. Instead my task was to ask what do you most want to do that you cannot right now? Without fail we found avenues, those with learning disabilities use screen readers as well, shifting those seeking solutions into the hundreds of millions. I believe 25% of the us population alone has a print disability for which screen reading technology can provide solutions. You sincerely believe that those individuals do not deserve a chance to write their own goal dictionaries here? If djgpp can work in expansive ways with DOS, so can others. For people like Felix, who only want to play an old adventure game from time to time, this seems overkill - hence my idea to use VirtualBox instead, to run FreeDOS inside of it and connect an emulated software synthesizer. Felix is one of hundreds of millions on the planet, why is it overkill just because of his individual goal? As noted above there are far far more ways to achieve speech synthesis besides what you tried. All this can be done for free, without any extra hardware, given that one has the patience and skills to set it all up. Speaking personally, that Felix was willing to do all that work for gaming suggests to me, that
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
I: Sorry to be so long getting back to you. It’s the next-to-the-last line in fdauto that looks for a batch file called “fdassist.bat”. Only reason I did that was that it allowed the screen reader to be installed as a package which would run both on the live cd and in the installed environment. I have Jerome Shidell to thank for that approach. So, you can just either remove that line in fdauto, or, remove fdassist.bat under the c:\fdos\bin directory and that will disable ASAP. You can also use fdpkg to uninstall asap like this: fdinst remove asap And it will remove it completely. If you do that, be sure you have something set up to run in its place. If you have the CD-Rom mounted, you can re-install ASAP by typing: Fdinst install d:\packages\assist\asap.zip Note this will only work on the image with ASAP on it, as ASAP is not part of the main distro. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Felix G.Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2020 8:51 AMTo: Discussion and general questions about FreeDOS.Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user Hello Joseph,I'm loving your live image!However, I'm unsuccessfully trying to find the place in fdauto.bat orfdconfig.sys where it loads asap, because maybe I'd like to replaceasap with hal for kicks, or giggles, or both.Could you please enlighten me?Best,Felix Am Mi., 18. März 2020 um 17:02 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Viste :> > On 18/03/2020 16:54, joseph.nor...@gmail.com wrote:> > I just booted into FreeDOS and it worked ok. Pressing /l told me I was> > on line 25 and read the DOS prompt.> > Sounds nice. Thanks for confirming, at least I know now that it is> supposed to work out of the box. It must be something off with my> VirtualBox configuration then - in fact I tested ASAP right now and it> immediately freezes. The only screen reader that appears to work for me> is JAWS. I suspect this has to do with some RTS/CTS emulation glitch> within VirtualBox, I will have to do some deeper investigations.> > cheers,> Mateusz> > > ___> Freedos-user mailing list> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user ___Freedos-user mailing listFreedos-user@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://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] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hello Joseph, I'm loving your live image! However, I'm unsuccessfully trying to find the place in fdauto.bat or fdconfig.sys where it loads asap, because maybe I'd like to replace asap with hal for kicks, or giggles, or both. Could you please enlighten me? Best, Felix Am Mi., 18. März 2020 um 17:02 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Viste : > > On 18/03/2020 16:54, joseph.nor...@gmail.com wrote: > > I just booted into FreeDOS and it worked ok. Pressing /l told me I was > > on line 25 and read the DOS prompt. > > Sounds nice. Thanks for confirming, at least I know now that it is > supposed to work out of the box. It must be something off with my > VirtualBox configuration then - in fact I tested ASAP right now and it > immediately freezes. The only screen reader that appears to work for me > is JAWS. I suspect this has to do with some RTS/CTS emulation glitch > within VirtualBox, I will have to do some deeper investigations. > > cheers, > Mateusz > > > ___ > 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] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
On 18/03/2020 16:54, joseph.nor...@gmail.com wrote: I just booted into FreeDOS and it worked ok. Pressing /l told me I was on line 25 and read the DOS prompt. Sounds nice. Thanks for confirming, at least I know now that it is supposed to work out of the box. It must be something off with my VirtualBox configuration then - in fact I tested ASAP right now and it immediately freezes. The only screen reader that appears to work for me is JAWS. I suspect this has to do with some RTS/CTS emulation glitch within VirtualBox, I will have to do some deeper investigations. cheers, Mateusz ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hi: PROVOX loads fine, but it sends only "synth clear" (0x05) reset messages over COM1, for example when I press slash + L. It never sends me anything to actually read aloud. Did it talk to you? What key presses have you performed? I just booted into FreeDOS and it worked ok. Pressing /l told me I was on line 25 and read the DOS prompt. If I press return, it says “enter” and repeats the DOS prompt. Not sure what’s going on on your end. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
On 18/03/2020 16:05, joseph.nor...@gmail.com wrote: Provox does work, but to install it you do two things. First, you need to run the provox.exe tsr. Did that. Next, at the end of the fdauto.bat, you place a pv.exe command with the synthesizer perameter after it, for example: c:\provox\pv.exe bns Did that, as well. PROVOX loads fine, but it sends only "synth clear" (0x05) reset messages over COM1, for example when I press slash + L. It never sends me anything to actually read aloud. Did it talk to you? What key presses have you performed? Mateusz ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hi: Now, going back to FreeDOS: the only improvement I can think of is to include some sort of screen reader into the distribution. That is why I was interested in the PROVOX option, since PROVOX appears to have a license perfectly compatible with FreeDOS. Sadly, I was unable to make it output any sound, so I wonder whether it works at all. JAWS, Provox does work, but to install it you do two things. First, you need to run the provox.exe tsr. You can run it in fdconfig.sys, and if you do it after the memory manager loads, it will load high automatically. Or, you can put provox.exe in the fdauto.bat. You would need to do an lh on that to load it high. Next, at the end of the fdauto.bat, you place a pv.exe command with the synthesizer perameter after it, for example: c:\provox\pv.exe bns I think bns defaults to com1, but, you can put a space and com1 after the bns perameter. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
I'd also like to add that when I speak of a battle, I am in no way referring to a battle against anyone here, or any FreeDOS developer. The rather military term was strictly in reference to the effort of overcoming or circumventing technical limitations. Best, Felix Am Mi., 18. März 2020 um 10:22 Uhr schrieb Felix G. : > > Hello everyone, > I'd like to report that I got FreeDOS to work, and speak to me, from a > virtual machine using a speech synthesizer emulator on the host, > thanks to Joseph's kind help in the form of valuable advice and a > great live image with ASAP. I was also able to get files into the VM > by converting a folder to an iso then mounting that as a virtual > CD-ROM. Still moderately convoluted, as I am the first to admit. > Karen, I agree with you, based on first principles, that every > operating system should be accessible out of the box. However, given > the nature of FreeDOS, I currently don't see any viable way of > accomplishing this. Mind you, I want it to happen, and I have already > joined you in this battle by doing research, I just haven't figured > out how. On a related note, I like your style of advocacy for the > blind, especially your emphasis on individual preferences, freedom of > choice, and avoidance of unnecessary categorization. > Best, > Felix > > Am Mi., 18. März 2020 um 08:57 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Viste : > > > > On 18/03/2020 02:37, Karen Lewellen wrote: > > > Why cannot speech be built native to freedos the way it is, I > > > understand, native to Linux distros, including the use of hardware? > > > > FreeDOS, like other flavors of DOS, is a 16-bit, real-mode operating > > system. This means it runs within an extremely constrained environment: > > typically with access to a maximum of 640 kilobytes of memory, one taks > > at a time, and being able to address objects no bigger than 64 > > kilobytes. It is technically unrealistic to expect performing any kind > > of native voice synthesis in such configuration. The only realistic way > > would be to output text through a hardware port, like the RS-232, and > > let an external device do the sound generation. And that's exactly what > > screen readers do already. But it means of course that one must have an > > extra hardware synthesizer, which may or may not be an acceptable > > investment, depending on the ultimate goal. For people like Felix, who > > only want to play an old adventure game from time to time, this seems > > overkill - hence my idea to use VirtualBox instead, to run FreeDOS > > inside of it and connect an emulated software synthesizer. All this can > > be done for free, without any extra hardware, given that one has the > > patience and skills to set it all up. > > > > Now, going back to FreeDOS: the only improvement I can think of is to > > include some sort of screen reader into the distribution. That is why I > > was interested in the PROVOX option, since PROVOX appears to have a > > license perfectly compatible with FreeDOS. Sadly, I was unable to make > > it output any sound, so I wonder whether it works at all. JAWS, on the > > other hand, works very well, but cannot be included into FreeDOS due to > > an incompatible license. > > > > Mateusz > > > > > > ___ > > 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] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hello everyone, I'd like to report that I got FreeDOS to work, and speak to me, from a virtual machine using a speech synthesizer emulator on the host, thanks to Joseph's kind help in the form of valuable advice and a great live image with ASAP. I was also able to get files into the VM by converting a folder to an iso then mounting that as a virtual CD-ROM. Still moderately convoluted, as I am the first to admit. Karen, I agree with you, based on first principles, that every operating system should be accessible out of the box. However, given the nature of FreeDOS, I currently don't see any viable way of accomplishing this. Mind you, I want it to happen, and I have already joined you in this battle by doing research, I just haven't figured out how. On a related note, I like your style of advocacy for the blind, especially your emphasis on individual preferences, freedom of choice, and avoidance of unnecessary categorization. Best, Felix Am Mi., 18. März 2020 um 08:57 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Viste : > > On 18/03/2020 02:37, Karen Lewellen wrote: > > Why cannot speech be built native to freedos the way it is, I > > understand, native to Linux distros, including the use of hardware? > > FreeDOS, like other flavors of DOS, is a 16-bit, real-mode operating > system. This means it runs within an extremely constrained environment: > typically with access to a maximum of 640 kilobytes of memory, one taks > at a time, and being able to address objects no bigger than 64 > kilobytes. It is technically unrealistic to expect performing any kind > of native voice synthesis in such configuration. The only realistic way > would be to output text through a hardware port, like the RS-232, and > let an external device do the sound generation. And that's exactly what > screen readers do already. But it means of course that one must have an > extra hardware synthesizer, which may or may not be an acceptable > investment, depending on the ultimate goal. For people like Felix, who > only want to play an old adventure game from time to time, this seems > overkill - hence my idea to use VirtualBox instead, to run FreeDOS > inside of it and connect an emulated software synthesizer. All this can > be done for free, without any extra hardware, given that one has the > patience and skills to set it all up. > > Now, going back to FreeDOS: the only improvement I can think of is to > include some sort of screen reader into the distribution. That is why I > was interested in the PROVOX option, since PROVOX appears to have a > license perfectly compatible with FreeDOS. Sadly, I was unable to make > it output any sound, so I wonder whether it works at all. JAWS, on the > other hand, works very well, but cannot be included into FreeDOS due to > an incompatible license. > > Mateusz > > > ___ > 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] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
On 18/03/2020 02:37, Karen Lewellen wrote: Why cannot speech be built native to freedos the way it is, I understand, native to Linux distros, including the use of hardware? FreeDOS, like other flavors of DOS, is a 16-bit, real-mode operating system. This means it runs within an extremely constrained environment: typically with access to a maximum of 640 kilobytes of memory, one taks at a time, and being able to address objects no bigger than 64 kilobytes. It is technically unrealistic to expect performing any kind of native voice synthesis in such configuration. The only realistic way would be to output text through a hardware port, like the RS-232, and let an external device do the sound generation. And that's exactly what screen readers do already. But it means of course that one must have an extra hardware synthesizer, which may or may not be an acceptable investment, depending on the ultimate goal. For people like Felix, who only want to play an old adventure game from time to time, this seems overkill - hence my idea to use VirtualBox instead, to run FreeDOS inside of it and connect an emulated software synthesizer. All this can be done for free, without any extra hardware, given that one has the patience and skills to set it all up. Now, going back to FreeDOS: the only improvement I can think of is to include some sort of screen reader into the distribution. That is why I was interested in the PROVOX option, since PROVOX appears to have a license perfectly compatible with FreeDOS. Sadly, I was unable to make it output any sound, so I wonder whether it works at all. JAWS, on the other hand, works very well, but cannot be included into FreeDOS due to an incompatible license. Mateusz ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hi Joseph, Speaking personally, as expressed I invest in hardware for standard bootability. The machine I am using in this moment boots both from floppy and cd/ dvd drive, with both on board USB and serial ports. I am guessing I am confused because such hardware is rather simple to find. Your indication that freedos can be run as its own operating system, then goes back to the entire accessibility question. Why cannot speech be built native to freedos the way it is, I understand, native to Linux distros, including the use of hardware? Why not a talking install of freedos that gives one the ability to well just install freedos? Realizing with absolute firmness that the complex door has its benefits for some, I just suppose I am wondering why a less complex door cannot also exist. Just a thought, Kare Who is going to ask about synthesizer emulator options elsewhere, as the choice of braille & speak, but nothing else seems sort of odd. On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, joseph.nor...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Karen: If your computer can boot a cd, or can boot a floppy, you can install FreeDOS. I could probably boot it up on this laptop since it's in legacy mode, but, I don't think FreeDOS would recognize the sata drive. Seems like I did boot a cd-rom containing MS-DOS one time, but, that may have been another laptop. There is no serial port, though, so it wouldn't do anything but beep.?? I guess I could run Randy Formenti's morse program and get DOS output in morse code, but, that would be tedious. If you have a machine with a serial port, and a serial synth, no reason it wouldn't work. Sorry for the confusion.Hi Karen: Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Karen Lewellen Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 6:42 PM To: Discussion and general questions about FreeDOS. Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user Hi Bret, Thanks for that answer. Well then my question is if freedos can actually be installed in an actual, instead of virtual environment??? If not, then why not? ?? Because DOS is my only operating system, I have no issues locating actual computers, by which I mean p3 and p4 machines for my efforts. As a journalist and media professional, I must know firmly that any tool I am using is reliable. I respect that for some?? DOS is fun, but if one wants to work seriously, is freedos even worth considering, at least if one cannot use it on physical hardware? Kare On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, Bret Johnson wrote: > Karen: Inside a Virtual Machine, ALL hardware is virtualized ??to some degree or other -- you never get direct access to the real hardware (whether it's keyboard or mouse or video screen or hard drive or serial port or even the clock).?? Exactly what gets virtualized through to the VM and exactly how it gets passed through depends on the VM.?? Different VM's do some things better than others. I've played around a little bit with different VM's (VMWare, Bochs, DOSBox, QEMU, VirtualPC, PCEm, and others).?? None of them are very easy to set up. and they all have their limitations and quirks.?? At least for my purposes, I still find VMWare to be better than the others even though I still consider it really pretty bad and don't do anything serious with it.?? And again, the main problem I have with VMWare is that it does not pass the keyboard though to the VM like it should and the keyboard is VERY critical in DOS (far more critical than the mouse). ___ 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] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hi Joseph, > If your computer can boot a cd, or can boot a floppy, you can install > FreeDOS. Booting from USB stick is an option with many modern BIOSes, too, and supported by FreeDOS. > I could probably boot it up on this laptop since it's in legacy mode, > but, I don't think FreeDOS would recognize the sata drive. As long as the BIOS can boot from it, FreeDOS supports your harddisk. For better speed with DOS drivers, avoid AHCI mode, though: SATA and IDE / PATA / ATAPI drives can operate faster with drivers such as UHDD and, for CD/DVD/BD, UDVD2, which of course can also be used with most other DOS versions, such as MS DOS. Only MBR partition tables up to 2 TB will be recognized, which can cause dual boot issues. MS DOS also sees all BIOS-recognized harddisks but can only do CHS MBR partitions within the first 8 GB and only FAT16 partitions with at most 2 GB size per partition. The DOS which comes with Windows 95 / 98 is a bit more flexible, so it can be used more or less on the same harddisks etc. as FreeDOS. Regards, Eric ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hi Karen: If your computer can boot a cd, or can boot a floppy, you can install FreeDOS. I could probably boot it up on this laptop since it's in legacy mode, but, I don't think FreeDOS would recognize the sata drive. Seems like I did boot a cd-rom containing MS-DOS one time, but, that may have been another laptop. There is no serial port, though, so it wouldn't do anything but beep. I guess I could run Randy Formenti's morse program and get DOS output in morse code, but, that would be tedious. If you have a machine with a serial port, and a serial synth, no reason it wouldn't work. Sorry for the confusion.Hi Karen: Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Karen LewellenSent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 6:42 PMTo: Discussion and general questions about FreeDOS.Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user Hi Bret,Thanks for that answer.Well then my question is if freedos can actually be installed in an actual, instead of virtual environment? If not, then why not? Because DOS is my only operating system, I have no issues locating actual computers, by which I mean p3 and p4 machines for my efforts.As a journalist and media professional, I must know firmly that any tool I am using is reliable.I respect that for some DOS is fun, but if one wants to work seriously, is freedos even worth considering, at least if one cannot use it on physical hardware?Kare On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, Bret Johnson wrote: > Karen: Inside a Virtual Machine, ALL hardware is virtualized to some degree or other -- you never get direct access to the real hardware (whether it's keyboard or mouse or video screen or hard drive or serial port or even the clock). Exactly what gets virtualized through to the VM and exactly how it gets passed through depends on the VM. Different VM's do some things better than others. I've played around a little bit with different VM's (VMWare, Bochs, DOSBox, QEMU, VirtualPC, PCEm, and others). None of them are very easy to set up. and they all have their limitations and quirks. At least for my purposes, I still find VMWare to be better than the others even though I still consider it really pretty bad and don't do anything serious with it. And again, the main problem I have with VMWare is that it does not pass the keyboard though to the VM like it should and the keyboard is VERY critical in DOS (far more critical than the mouse). ___Freedos-user mailing listFreedos-user@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://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] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Hi Bret, Thanks for that answer. Well then my question is if freedos can actually be installed in an actual, instead of virtual environment? If not, then why not? Because DOS is my only operating system, I have no issues locating actual computers, by which I mean p3 and p4 machines for my efforts. As a journalist and media professional, I must know firmly that any tool I am using is reliable. I respect that for some DOS is fun, but if one wants to work seriously, is freedos even worth considering, at least if one cannot use it on physical hardware? Kare On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, Bret Johnson wrote: Karen: Inside a Virtual Machine, ALL hardware is virtualized to some degree or other -- you never get direct access to the real hardware (whether it's keyboard or mouse or video screen or hard drive or serial port or even the clock). Exactly what gets virtualized through to the VM and exactly how it gets passed through depends on the VM. Different VM's do some things better than others. I've played around a little bit with different VM's (VMWare, Bochs, DOSBox, QEMU, VirtualPC, PCEm, and others). None of them are very easy to set up. and they all have their limitations and quirks. At least for my purposes, I still find VMWare to be better than the others even though I still consider it really pretty bad and don't do anything serious with it. And again, the main problem I have with VMWare is that it does not pass the keyboard though to the VM like it should and the keyboard is VERY critical in DOS (far more critical than the mouse). ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
I may as well jump on the bandwagon here... :D I find VirtualBox quite easy to set up; most things just work out-of-the box, whatever the OS you install upon it, and its simple GUI allows even things which do need a bit of configuration to be handled in a fairly straightforward manner. Also - although it does not allow native disk access as you described VMWare does - its uncompressed .VDI files can be mounted (under Linux, at least) and accessed directly from the desktop without any intervention from VirtualBox itself or the VM to which it is attached. Or, if one runs Windows instead, there is [Arsenal Image Mounter](https://github.com/ArsenalRecon/Arsenal-Image-Mounter) which provides similar functionality. Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email. ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, March 17, 2020 5:20 PM, Bret Johnson wrote: > Karen: > > Inside a Virtual Machine, ALL hardware is virtualized to some degree or > other -- you never get direct access to the real hardware (whether it's > keyboard or mouse or video screen or hard drive or serial port or even the > clock). Exactly what gets virtualized through to the VM and exactly how it > gets passed through depends on the VM. Different VM's do some things better > than others. > > I've played around a little bit with different VM's (VMWare, Bochs, DOSBox, > QEMU, VirtualPC, PCEm, and others). None of them are very easy to set up. > and they all have their limitations and quirks. At least for my purposes, I > still find VMWare to be better than the others even though I still consider > it really pretty bad and don't do anything serious with it. And again, the > main problem I have with VMWare is that it does not pass the keyboard though > to the VM like it should and the keyboard is VERY critical in DOS (far more > critical than the mouse).___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Karen: Inside a Virtual Machine, ALL hardware is virtualized to some degree or other -- you never get direct access to the real hardware (whether it's keyboard or mouse or video screen or hard drive or serial port or even the clock). Exactly what gets virtualized through to the VM and exactly how it gets passed through depends on the VM. Different VM's do some things better than others. I've played around a little bit with different VM's (VMWare, Bochs, DOSBox, QEMU, VirtualPC, PCEm, and others). None of them are very easy to set up. and they all have their limitations and quirks. At least for my purposes, I still find VMWare to be better than the others even though I still consider it really pretty bad and don't do anything serious with it. And again, the main problem I have with VMWare is that it does not pass the keyboard though to the VM like it should and the keyboard is VERY critical in DOS (far more critical than the mouse).___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
But Felix In many cases, all one needs to do Is grab an old laptop, install ms dos via cd, attach a dectalk or little talk or doubble talk or reading edge, or etc. etc., grab the games and enjoy the ride. i have such a laptop sitting in my office, although I use DOS for far more than games. But that is me, I would not project my experience on to you, feeling certain you would not do the same since blindness is not two sides of a sight coin. Karen On Mon, 16 Mar 2020, Felix G. wrote: Which is exactly why I'd love to boot natively into DOS, but as soon as I do this, my accessibility provisions break down. This is why I sometimes tend to sound like a grumpy old accessibility evangelist ranting about how everything is so much more complicated just because one sensory channel doesn't work. You should listen to me sometimes. Right now I caught myself rambling to a friend about how I need to invent convoluted cascades of virtualizations and emulations just to get an old game to run as it's supposed to, whereas a sighted person would just grab an old laptop, install FreeDOS natively, burn all their vaforite games to a cd and enjoy the ride. Oops, sorry, did it again. Best, Felix Am Mo., 16. März 2020 um 17:01 Uhr schrieb Bret Johnson : I'm not sure if it will end up being relevant to this discussion or not, but I use VMWare version 14 under Windows 10 to create a virtual machine for DOS. I prefer MS-DOS to FreeDOS for various reasons, though I do use some of the FreeDOS utilities. I actually have the machine set up to dual-boot, where I can either boot Windows 10 or boot directly to "real" DOS. Virtual machines are nice for some things, but they are far from a panacea. The main reason I like VMWare is that it allows you to use a real partition on the hard drive as one of the disks in the DOS virtual machine. You are not limited to "software hard drives" like you are in most other VM's. That is, whatever I do to the hard drive in the DOS VM (or even directly from Windows) automatically shows up when I boot to real DOS and vice versa. I don't need to do any FTP'ing or creating new ISO's or even remembering what I need to change the next time I boot up to keep my real DOS and my Virtual DOS synchronized. The ability to access a real hard drive (or partition) from inside the DOS VM is the part of VMWare that I really like. The part I really dislike is that it does a VERY bad job of handling the keyboard. Inside the DOS VM the modifier keys (Shift, Control, Alt) are constantly getting "stuck" and the keyboard releases for some reason are not always correctly sent to the VM. I'm constantly needing to press the modifier keys in the middle of my VM sessions so the key releases are recognized like they're supposed to be. For that reason, I don't use the VMWare Virtual DOS for any serious work since it's a real PITA to use the keyboard. I do know that DOSBox will also let you access real partitions, but almost none of the DOS programs I use work properly in DOSBox. DOSBox is FAR from being a "real" DOS environment and is very limited in what you can do with it. ___ 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 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Bret, Your points are important for a serious screen reader, because the commands to access speech, read the current line or sections of the screen, etc., incorporate those modifier keys. That is done so the screen reader works in harmony with the system, real ms dos in this case. My question for you is if running ms dos from your hard drive in this way gives you access, or would give you access to the machine's actual hardware? i run Ms. Dos, but as the only system on my computer. Meaning my hardware synthesizer attached to my physical serial port works just fine. Same for the external USB drive attached to my physical USB port. Would that also happen using ms DOS in a virtual environment? Karen On Mon, 16 Mar 2020, Bret Johnson wrote: I'm not sure if it will end up being relevant to this discussion or not, but I use VMWare version 14 under Windows 10 to create a virtual machine for DOS. I prefer MS-DOS to FreeDOS for various reasons, though I do use some of the FreeDOS utilities. I actually have the machine set up to dual-boot, where I can either boot Windows 10 or boot directly to "real" DOS. Virtual machines are nice for some things, but they are far from a panacea. The main reason I like VMWare is that it allows you to use a real partition on the hard drive as one of the disks in the DOS virtual machine. You are not limited to "software hard drives" like you are in most other VM's. That is, whatever I do to the hard drive in the DOS VM (or even directly from Windows) automatically shows up when I boot to real DOS and vice versa. I don't need to do any FTP'ing or creating new ISO's or even remembering what I need to change the next time I boot up to keep my real DOS and my Virtual DOS synchronized. The ability to access a real hard drive (or partition) from inside the DOS VM is the part of VMWare that I really like. The part I really dislike is that it does a VERY bad job of handling the keyboard. Inside the DOS VM the modifier keys (Shift, Control, Alt) are constantly getting "stuck" and the keyboard releases for some reason are not always correctly sent to the VM. I'm constantly needing to press the modifier keys in the middle of my VM sessions so the key releases are recognized like they're supposed to be. For that reason, I don't use the VMWare Virtual DOS for any serious work since it's a real PITA to use the keyboard. I do know that DOSBox will also let you access real partitions, but almost none of the DOS programs I use work properly in DOSBox. DOSBox is FAR from being a "real" DOS environment and is very limited in what you can do with it.___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
Which is exactly why I'd love to boot natively into DOS, but as soon as I do this, my accessibility provisions break down. This is why I sometimes tend to sound like a grumpy old accessibility evangelist ranting about how everything is so much more complicated just because one sensory channel doesn't work. You should listen to me sometimes. Right now I caught myself rambling to a friend about how I need to invent convoluted cascades of virtualizations and emulations just to get an old game to run as it's supposed to, whereas a sighted person would just grab an old laptop, install FreeDOS natively, burn all their vaforite games to a cd and enjoy the ride. Oops, sorry, did it again. Best, Felix Am Mo., 16. März 2020 um 17:01 Uhr schrieb Bret Johnson : > > I'm not sure if it will end up being relevant to this discussion or not, but > I use VMWare version 14 under Windows 10 to create a virtual machine for DOS. > I prefer MS-DOS to FreeDOS for various reasons, though I do use some of the > FreeDOS utilities. I actually have the machine set up to dual-boot, where I > can either boot Windows 10 or boot directly to "real" DOS. Virtual machines > are nice for some things, but they are far from a panacea. > > The main reason I like VMWare is that it allows you to use a real partition > on the hard drive as one of the disks in the DOS virtual machine. You are > not limited to "software hard drives" like you are in most other VM's. That > is, whatever I do to the hard drive in the DOS VM (or even directly from > Windows) automatically shows up when I boot to real DOS and vice versa. I > don't need to do any FTP'ing or creating new ISO's or even remembering what I > need to change the next time I boot up to keep my real DOS and my Virtual DOS > synchronized. > > The ability to access a real hard drive (or partition) from inside the DOS VM > is the part of VMWare that I really like. The part I really dislike is that > it does a VERY bad job of handling the keyboard. Inside the DOS VM the > modifier keys (Shift, Control, Alt) are constantly getting "stuck" and the > keyboard releases for some reason are not always correctly sent to the VM. > I'm constantly needing to press the modifier keys in the middle of my VM > sessions so the key releases are recognized like they're supposed to be. For > that reason, I don't use the VMWare Virtual DOS for any serious work since > it's a real PITA to use the keyboard. > > I do know that DOSBox will also let you access real partitions, but almost > none of the DOS programs I use work properly in DOSBox. DOSBox is FAR from > being a "real" DOS environment and is very limited in what you can do with it. > ___ > 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] Introducing myself, and inquiring about using FreeD OS as a blind user
I'm not sure if it will end up being relevant to this discussion or not, but I use VMWare version 14 under Windows 10 to create a virtual machine for DOS. I prefer MS-DOS to FreeDOS for various reasons, though I do use some of the FreeDOS utilities. I actually have the machine set up to dual-boot, where I can either boot Windows 10 or boot directly to "real" DOS. Virtual machines are nice for some things, but they are far from a panacea. The main reason I like VMWare is that it allows you to use a real partition on the hard drive as one of the disks in the DOS virtual machine. You are not limited to "software hard drives" like you are in most other VM's. That is, whatever I do to the hard drive in the DOS VM (or even directly from Windows) automatically shows up when I boot to real DOS and vice versa. I don't need to do any FTP'ing or creating new ISO's or even remembering what I need to change the next time I boot up to keep my real DOS and my Virtual DOS synchronized. The ability to access a real hard drive (or partition) from inside the DOS VM is the part of VMWare that I really like. The part I really dislike is that it does a VERY bad job of handling the keyboard. Inside the DOS VM the modifier keys (Shift, Control, Alt) are constantly getting "stuck" and the keyboard releases for some reason are not always correctly sent to the VM. I'm constantly needing to press the modifier keys in the middle of my VM sessions so the key releases are recognized like they're supposed to be. For that reason, I don't use the VMWare Virtual DOS for any serious work since it's a real PITA to use the keyboard. I do know that DOSBox will also let you access real partitions, but almost none of the DOS programs I use work properly in DOSBox. DOSBox is FAR from being a "real" DOS environment and is very limited in what you can do with it.___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
