Re: [Freedos-user] LBA And FreeDOS.
Greetings jack, I certainly agree with your stance here. I have been using one ms dos 7.1 package since at least 2007 or so easily and effortlessly. I have helped others find it as well. I am not sure where the .bg country code is, but I could not connect to the site when I tried it before writing this note. it may be that they dislike low graphics browsers like lynx, or that they are now getting lots of traffic. I need, no demand smiles reliability, so skip buts myself. I have not used ms dos 6.22 for a grand while though, my need for much larger drives, the one I use for backup is over 30 gig, made the 7.1 door more practical. I do wonder sometimes though if I could accomplish a bit of both worlds. What stands out for you in dos 6.22 over the later 7.1 edition of ms dos? Most important of all, hear hear on using what you desire. It is why there is a personal in pc after all. Karen On Sat, 7 Dec 2013, Jack wrote: Rugxulo, Re: your recent posts, I will summarize my feeling as follows: LZ-DOS and other copies of V7.10 MS-DOS are still available. You may not consider it reliable, and Dennis may have some odd problem accessing it, but that website http://ms-dos7.hit.bg did give me, on 5-Dec-2013, a working 2-diskette copy of V7.10 which I was able to install on my system (up to the point of writing IO.SYS and MS-DOS.SYS, which I did not do since I want to continue with V6.22 MS-DOS). I again accessed the exact URL shown above a moment ago, while writing this E-Mail, and I again had no problem with it. Others can try doing the same. The 2-diskette installation set for V7.10 MS-DOS, available on that site, does work well, and it rather STRONGLY suggests its installer was written by Microsoft. From my own experience I know that this V7.10 MS-DOS package is virtually identical to the one offered by Wengier Wu, which I have used for my own tests of UIDE for at least 6 years. Others can try using the installation diskettes from http://ms-dos7.hit.bg, then make their OWN conclusion about the availability of V7.10 MS-DOS. Based on the above, I still say that LBA capability WAS part of later MS-DOS versions, that were and still are available, and I still believe the FreeDOS main page comment that LBA was unavailable in MS-DOS is NOT quite true! I shall not argue legalities with you, nor in fact do I know any lawyers. My own divorce and jury-duty experiences in the past have left me NOT WANTING to know any! Instead of making such an issue of legalities, perhaps you should STOP at your own statement above: Honestly, just use whatever you want to use, 'whatever works!' No-argument here, so I will continue to use my reliable and SMALL V6.22 MS-DOS. I hate bugs and bloat, of which V6.22 MS-DOS has neither! And re: your comment that You can't 'freely' download, modify or redistribute any DOS besides FreeDOS, I can only say again that the above website most-certainly DID work for me! -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Freedos hangs
I was delighted to discover FreeDos, because I have an old Music DOS data base that I've been using since 1986. It runs in XP but not in Win 7. So I loaded the virtual box and then FreeDos. except that it never finished loading after reaching the point in the instructions (End of Chapter Five) where there is the warning about UIDE taking a long time to load. I get the line Kernel: allocated 46 Diskbuffers + 24472 Bytes in HMA It had not changed in 45 minutes or even over night when I started over and got the same result. Any suggestions? Bob Moler -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos hangs
the new virtualbox and the new uide don't do that. someone can show you where the new (uide) drivers are. eufdp...@yahoo.com eufdp...@yahoo.com eufdp...@yahoo.com eufdp...@yahoo.com eufdp...@yahoo.com On Saturday, December 7, 2013 5:47 PM, Robert Moler rbmo...@verizon.net wrote: I was delighted to discover FreeDos, because I have an old Music DOS data base that I've been using since 1986. It runs in XP but not in Win 7. So I loaded the virtual box and then FreeDos. except that it never finished loading after reaching the point in the instructions (End of Chapter Five) where there is the warning about UIDE taking a long time to load. I get the line Kernel: allocated 46 Diskbuffers + 24472 Bytes in HMA It had not changed in 45 minutes or even over night when I started over and got the same result. Any suggestions? Bob Moler -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] LBA And FreeDOS.
Karen, I certainly agree with your stance here. I have been using one ms-dos 7.1 package since at least 2007 or so, easily and effort- lessly. I have helped others find it as well. I am not sure where the .bg country code is, but I could not connect to the site when I tried it before writing this note. It may be that they dislike low graphics browsers like lynx, or that they are now getting lots of traffic. For your info, .bg is Bulgaria. Given both Dennis's and your problems with the website I noted, I suspect there could be some international constraints AGAINST Bulgaria, in some areas! I need, no demand smiles reliability, so skip buts myself. I have not used ms-dos 6.22 for a grand while though, my need for much larger drives, the one I use for backup is over 30 gig, made the 7.1 door more practical. I do wonder sometimes though if I could accomplish a bit of both worlds. What stands out for you in dos 6.22 over the later 7.1 edition of ms-dos? My father was a packrat (saved EVERYTHING), and I am not. My total storage, after almost 50 years of software, is only 180-MB and fits easily on CD-RW disks, of which I have 3 as my backups. Thus, I do not need FAT32 or long filenames, and I do not need the bloat that comes with most V7.10 MS-DOS programs. I also do NOT like that V7.10 will LOSE a lock drive command for some reason that I have never understood, and that is a nuisance as it always occurs when I do not expect it. So I stay with V6.22 MS-DOS, which is NOT bloated, and has NO lock drive to cause me any profanity! My actual Internet vehicle is V4.0 Win/NT, since there are no good browsers, CD burners, etc., for use with MS-DOS. V6.22 or V7.10 helps me there, as Win/NT denies me the right to deal with some system files. V6.22 MS-DOS does not! Most important of all, hear hear on using what you desire. It is why there is a personal in pc after all. A pleasure to know you, dear Lady, after all my dealings on this forum with legalists who FAIL to see that I was only giving an EXAMPLE of V7.10 still being available!V6.22 MS-DOS and V4.0 Win/NT also save poor-old retirees like me from paying $500/year tribute to Gates Co. for their semi-annual collection of new BUGS, which they call service packs! BEST wishes, Jack R. Ellis -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] LBA And FreeDOS.
Hi, On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:03 PM, dmccunney dennis.mccun...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Jack gykazequ...@earthlink.net wrote: You may not consider it reliable, and Dennis may have some odd problem accessing it, but that website http://ms-dos7.hit.bg did give me, on 5-Dec-2013, a working 2-diskette copy of V7.10 which I was able to install on my system ... Do a ping, whois, traceroute, or nslookup on it. Tell me what you get. The website doesn't load for me either. What do you use as a browser, and how do you reach the Internet? DETEST the Internet -- I remember when it was totally free, and absolutely NOT as commercial as it is now! DISGUSTING, to me, that almost all news URLs now force you to receive 500K or more of damned ADVERTISEMENTS, BEFORE you get one word of news! My system is still dial-up which saves BIG BUCKS for retirees like me, and I often ABANDON such miserable websites BEFORE they deign to offer me useful items! I use the Bloody Internet mainly as a vehicle for E-Mail. NO personal website, and I do not want one. You need to learn more about the Internet. For instance, blocking those 500K or more of ads is trivial. I don't see them, because I do. Let's face it, all modern websites are fairly heavyweight these days. They're not really trying to target Lynx and w3m and similar browsers. It's Firefox or IE or Safari (Flash, HTML5 / Javascript) only. They just assume everyone has fast connections via broadband / DSL / cable / satellite. You pretty much have to have a fast connection just to download modern things (e.g. Windows service packs, Linux distros, streaming movies, online video games). And sorry, but *something* has to pay for those free services that cost actual time and money to provide, and ads are what pays for them. Free in this context means Someone *else* pays for it. I don't. Some content providers are better about it than others. There is a point where they are clearly hammering the end user too much. I don't block ads, but it indeed can be frustrating. The 2-diskette installation set for V7.10 MS-DOS, available on that site, does work well, and it rather STRONGLY suggests its installer was written by Microsoft. Like I said, it's also available from the last Internet.org crawl if others have the same difficulty I did. I have no idea if such sites (like Archive.org) have government exceptions or not. I remain UNCONVINCED that the above site, or any others with that same release of V7.10 MS-DOS, is in fact illegal. If Microsoft has not formally released MS-DOS 7.10 as a freely available download, it's *not* legal under US law, which is what we're concerned with. Current U.S. law. As far as we know. Countries in the former Soviet Union have historically not cared about US law in this sort of case, so it's probably legal for the Bulgarian site to host the download under Bulgarian law. It's *not* legal to download and use it under US law Wasn't copyright originally only meant to last 20 years? So it's not like it was meant to last forever, eventually it was meant to land in the public domain for the public good. Well, obviously that's not how things really work, even in fast-moving tech circles (which seem to deprecate / obsolete / break something every single day). Seriously, we'll all be long dead if (not when) such things ever expire. Good luck running Windows 1995 software on Windows 2095! There's a lot of abandonware out there that is no longer sold/supported but never explicitly cut loose by the vendors, and sites that specialize in it. The legal status is at best murky. http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/25/5028974/internet-archives-new-historic-software-collection But quite honestly, I'm more than just a little skeptical. I think they're playing with fire. There is no way that somebody somewhere won't challenge this. (And it wasn't that long ago that Atari / Infogrames released Atari: 80 Games CD-ROM for Windows, et al.) It's very very naive to think that this is permitted. Which is a shame since lots of software is basically thrown away, unable to be used by anyone. Worse is that binary (and source) compatibility isn't a very prized trait either. (And no, modern doesn't care about legacy at all.) Either buy what already works (commercial software, even if used) or help develop a free/libre alternative. I don't see any other good option. Whether a vendor will take action will be governed by money. Taking action costs money. A vendor will do so if they are *aware* of the availability of the software on the Internet, and think they see lost revenue sufficient to justify taking action. They don't have to take action, only threaten, which is enough to make people scared. Even if the claims are baseless, it's enough to force most people to remove software. MS is likely not aware of the MS-DOS 7.10 distribution from the Bulgarian host, and probably won't care enough to take
[Freedos-user] Internet tools
On 12-7 dmccunney dennis.mccun...@gmail.com said: Do a ping, whois, traceroute, or nslookup on it. They are highly useful tools, and available online as well in addition to being local commands. I have a copy of ping, and know whois as a site (whois.net), but are the other commands available for DOS ? You need to learn more about the Internet. For instance, blocking those 500K or more of ads is trivial. How is it possible to block ads in web pages ? Many ads are not popups. PS-I was not able to connect from here to http://ms-dos7.hit.bg using DOS and Lynx. -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] LBA And FreeDOS.
Hi, On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Jack gykazequ...@earthlink.net wrote: I certainly agree with your stance here. I have been using one ms-dos 7.1 package since at least 2007 or so, easily and effort- lessly. I have helped others find it as well. It might be easier to just tell them to make a bootable floppy via Explorer. Or use RUFUS to install FreeDOS to USB pen drive. I am not sure where the .bg country code is, but I could not connect to the site when I tried it before writing this note. For your info, .bg is Bulgaria. Given both Dennis's and your problems with the website I noted, I suspect there could be some international constraints AGAINST Bulgaria, in some areas! Not as far as I know. Though again, U.S. politics are horribly arbitrary and annoying. (I didn't realize FreeDoom was equivalent to munitions.) IIRC, there are some countries where you're not even allowed to share software (even via SourceForge), lemme search ... Cuba, North Korea, Sudan, Syria, Iran. (The whole country! Not just government, not just army, but even common people! No TuxKart for you!) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sourceforge#Country_restrictions My father was a packrat (saved EVERYTHING), and I am not. My total storage, after almost 50 years of software, is only 180-MB and fits easily on CD-RW disks, of which I have 3 as my backups. It depends on needs. Some people have to test lots of software, so they have to keep backups of various compilers and OSes, etc. The days of software being small and self-contained are long gone, so often you have to download a lot of cruft just to get what you want. Again, a fast broadband connection is strongly implied, sadly. Also, and I hate to mention this (as it doesn't interest me and is frankly way outside the scope of traditional computing), but multimedia (esp. HD) takes up tons of space, and people often download (or make their own) movies, songs, etc. It's very very easy to run out of space with things like that. Heck, even a single modern game takes several gigs. One single-layer DVD is 4.7 GB (or such), and even that's (almost) obsolete in favor of Blu-Ray. I have no idea how many BD layers current consoles use (EDIT: Wikipedia says 16 layer [400 GB] for PS4), but long story short, it's far more than 180 MB. Though a lot of content doesn't have to be locally available on hard drive as most people don't need the full Wikipedia or full Project Gutenberg or full DJGPP mirror or all sources (20 GB?) to every software from their Linux distro installed on their system. Thus, I do not need FAT32 or long filenames, FAT32 was only in later versions (OSR2?), so the original vanilla Win95 didn't support it anyways, IIRC. LFNs aren't reliant on FAT32, you can use any FAT, though Win95 explicitly doesn't support those at all in DOS mode, so even there you're stuck to an external driver like DOSLFN. BTW, NT 4.0 (1996?) didn't support either of those, so only Win2000 fixed that, but at least DJGPP mirrors have a NTLFN driver to somewhat support LFNs there (which most software these days refuses to live without): http://na.mirror.garr.it/mirrors/djgpp/current/v2misc/ntlfn08b.zip http://na.mirror.garr.it/mirrors/djgpp/current/v2misc/ntlfn08s.zip and I do not need the bloat that comes with most V7.10 MS-DOS programs. Heheh. You can't even download VirtualBox without them forcing both Windows 32-bit and 64-bit editions in one lump! 100 MB! Pardon me if I think bloat doesn't really apply to DOS in any form. I also do NOT like that V7.10 will LOSE a lock drive command for some reason that I have never understood, and that is a nuisance as it always occurs when I do not expect it. So I stay with V6.22 MS-DOS, which is NOT bloated, and has NO lock drive to cause me any profanity! IIRC, Win95 came on 18 (overformatted) floppies. I guess traditional MS-DOS only used three to five? So, I'm not saying there isn't some fluff (esp. if you don't care for GUIs), but it's not that bad. Of course, I think one guy made a minimal Win95 install in only 5 MB, but it leaves a lot to be desired. (My current Win7 has a 400 MB \%windir%\fonts subdir, 517 files, and I don't even actively use any of them!) My actual Internet vehicle is V4.0 Win/NT, since there are no good browsers, CD burners, etc., for use with MS-DOS. V6.22 or V7.10 helps me there, as Win/NT denies me the right to deal with some system files. V6.22 MS-DOS does not! Good browsers? Depends on what you need. These days, they are almost OSes in their own right, using Flash, Javascript, HTML5, and a billion other plugins. It's a far cry from where HTML started twenty years ago. So no, compared to Firefox or Chrome, nothing is any good. But having said that, Georg's build of Dillo or Mikulas' build of Links are more than just a little impressive, even with known limitations. But a major problem is a heavy lack of (modern) packet drivers. IIRC, there is no free/libre (nor maybe even freeware)
