Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dan Schmidt]

That is a router, I can't guarantee it would work. (unless you put openwrt
on it)  However, this is built specifically to bridge:

https://www.amazon.com/IOGEAR-Universal-Ethernet-Adapter-GWU627/dp/B004UAKCS6

Takes around 20 seconds to connect, which is longer than it takes DOS to
boot on my machine.  (can be powered by usb)

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ulrich Hansen  wrote:

>
> > Am 24.04.2017 um 07:07 schrieb Dan Schmidt :
> >
> > Is this thread still about wireless for Dos?  If not, sorry for posting.
> >
> > If so, I bought a wireless to ethernet bridge - smaller than a deck of
> cards, runs on usb power - works great for my Dos machine.  I tried a wifi
> card that supposedly supported dos - never could get it working, threw it
> away in disgust.
>
> This sounds interesting. Is it something like this?
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TQEX8BO/ref=psdc_300189_t2_B00HZWOQZ6
> Thanks for the hint.
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Ulrich Hansen]

> Am 24.04.2017 um 07:07 schrieb Dan Schmidt :
> 
> Is this thread still about wireless for Dos?  If not, sorry for posting. 
> 
> If so, I bought a wireless to ethernet bridge - smaller than a deck of cards, 
> runs on usb power - works great for my Dos machine.  I tried a wifi card that 
> supposedly supported dos - never could get it working, threw it away in 
> disgust. 

This sounds interesting. Is it something like this?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TQEX8BO/ref=psdc_300189_t2_B00HZWOQZ6
Thanks for the hint.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dan Schmidt]

Is this thread still about wireless for Dos?  If not, sorry for posting.

If so, I bought a wireless to ethernet bridge - smaller than a deck of
cards, runs on usb power - works great for my Dos machine.  I tried a wifi
card that supposedly supported dos - never could get it working, threw it
away in disgust.

On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:

> On Ebay I purchased a cd with unreleased Corel dos
> software. There would have been a 5.6 version had it been
> released. Some woman got it from a boyfriend who
> worked for Corel and then sold it on Ebay for about $150.
> I was high bid.
>
> cheers
> DS
>
>
> On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 20:10:45 + "Thomas Mueller" 
> writes:
> > > I have Qpro 5.6 but haven't used it yet. Still using version 3
> > > The macros are powerful and a lot earier to use than
> > > Excel. Version 5.6 is said to have a solver built in
> > > like TK solver. One of these days I'll find out.
> >
> > > cheers
> > > DS
> >
> > Last Qpro version for DOS was 5.  Was there a 5.6?  DOS or Windows?
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> -
> -
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > ___
> > Freedos-user mailing list
> > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> >
>
>
> **
> >From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
> ***
>
> 
> Whatever Happened To Nancy Kerrigan?
> trend-chaser.com
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58fcbbdf8c0f63bdf76f2st02duc
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

On Ebay I purchased a cd with unreleased Corel dos
software. There would have been a 5.6 version had it been
released. Some woman got it from a boyfriend who
worked for Corel and then sold it on Ebay for about $150.
I was high bid.

cheers
DS


On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 20:10:45 + "Thomas Mueller" 
writes:
> > I have Qpro 5.6 but haven't used it yet. Still using version 3
> > The macros are powerful and a lot earier to use than
> > Excel. Version 5.6 is said to have a solver built in
> > like TK solver. One of these days I'll find out.
>  
> > cheers
> > DS
> 
> Last Qpro version for DOS was 5.  Was there a 5.6?  DOS or Windows?
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


Whatever Happened To Nancy Kerrigan?
trend-chaser.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58fcbbdf8c0f63bdf76f2st02duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Thomas Mueller]

> I have Qpro 5.6 but haven't used it yet. Still using version 3
> The macros are powerful and a lot earier to use than
> Excel. Version 5.6 is said to have a solver built in
> like TK solver. One of these days I'll find out.
 
> cheers
> DS

Last Qpro version for DOS was 5.  Was there a 5.6?  DOS or Windows?

Tom


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

The packet driver link for dos come up FORBIDDEN.

cheers
DS


On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 21:49:46 +0200 Ulrich Hansen 
writes:
> Several years ago I wrote everything I could find out about DOS and 
> Wifi here:
> 
> http://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/WiFi
> 
> If anybody finds out more about it, please give some feedback...
> 
> 
> > On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:07:35 -0400 dmccunney 
> 
> > writes:
> >> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dale E Sterner 
> >>  wrote:
> >>> I see that someone on Ebay is selling an HP mini
> >>> with a FREEDOS os installed. All the HP minis that
> >>> I've seen have wifi & bluetooth built in. That would
> >>> mean an 802.11 client to do it. The ad doesn't
> >>> mention wifi or bluetooth but every mini that I've seen
> >>> has it.
> >> 
> >> The machine may have the *hardware*.  Whether the hardware will 
> be
> >> *usable* will depend on software.
> >> 
> >> MSDOS was written back before Wifi and Bluetooth *existed*.  
> FreeDOS
> >> tries to be compatible with MSDOS, which means "support for what
> >> existed when MSDOS was current."
> >> 
> >> I would *not* expect Wifi or Bluetooth to be usable on the 
> machine 
> >> in
> >> FreeDOS, because the drivers don't exist.  If you want to use 
> Wifi 
> >> or
> >> Bluetooth on that hardware, you'll need to install another OS 
> that
> >> supports them.  (Depending on exactly which HP mini model it is, 
> >> there
> >> might be a flavor of Linux that can do it.)
> >> __
> >> Dennis
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
>
-
> > -
> >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >> ___
> >> Freedos-user mailing list
> >> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > **
> >> From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
> > http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
> > ***
> > 
> > 
> > The Easiest Way To Shed Deep Fat?
> > 3 Harmful Foods
> > 
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58f7bb5e84cae3b5e7b11st02duc
> > 
> > 
>
-
-
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > ___
> > Freedos-user mailing list
> > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


Why Your City Doctors No Longer Prescribe Metformin
Vibrant Health Network
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58fb76272d2d7762615f8st02duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

I have Qpro 5.6 but haven't used it yet. Still using version 3
The macros are powerful and a lot earier to use than
Excel. Version 5.6 is said to have a solver built in
like TK solver. One of these days I'll find out.

cheers
DS




On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 02:35:08 + "Thomas Mueller" 
writes:
> > I find that your MS dos 7.1 has been doing a little better
> > than FREEDOS. Jemmex sometimes hangs up.
> > Corel made great DOS software. I use their Qpro
> > to do my taxes. I fill in the blanks and it calclates my tax.
>  
> > cheers
> > DS
> 
> I too used Borland Quattro Pro for DOS, through v5, to calculate 
> income taxes.
> 
> That was the last DOS version.  I don't think Corel did anything 
> with Quattro Pro for DOS, but continued Quattro Pro for Windows for 
> some time.
> 
> I was able to run Quattro Pro 5 for DOS in DOSBox but felt better 
> with straight DOS.
> 
> I used OS/2 Warp 3 and 4 DOS session, DR-DOS 7.03 and later FreeDOS.
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


1 Simple Trick Removes Eye Bags & Lip Lines in Seconds
Fit Mom Daily
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58fb65f34a85065f308cdst01duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Thomas Mueller]

> I find that your MS dos 7.1 has been doing a little better
> than FREEDOS. Jemmex sometimes hangs up.
> Corel made great DOS software. I use their Qpro
> to do my taxes. I fill in the blanks and it calclates my tax.
 
> cheers
> DS

I too used Borland Quattro Pro for DOS, through v5, to calculate income taxes.

That was the last DOS version.  I don't think Corel did anything with Quattro 
Pro for DOS, but continued Quattro Pro for Windows for some time.

I was able to run Quattro Pro 5 for DOS in DOSBox but felt better with straight 
DOS.

I used OS/2 Warp 3 and 4 DOS session, DR-DOS 7.03 and later FreeDOS.

Tom


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[geneb]

On Fri, 21 Apr 2017, Dale E Sterner wrote:

> The win 7 was a 32 bit copy purchased on Amazon.
> The software was a dvd converter to convert dvds to mp4.
> It didn't work on XP so I wanted to try it on win 7; didn't work
> there either. The 1st activation was slow painful and
> successful. Win 7 gave warning about making changes.
> I followed all instructions to the letter.
> The message came from win 7. If you are connected
> to wifi I think it does the reactivation automatically and
> quietly.

Windows will give a 30 day grace period before a new installs activation 
is required.

g.


-- 
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

I find that your MS dos 7.1 has been doing a little better
than FREEDOS. Jemmex sometimes hangs up.
Corel made great DOS software. I use their Qpro
to do my taxes. I fill in the blanks and it calclates my tax.

cheers
DS



On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 18:49:08 -0400 (EDT) Karen Lewellen
 writes:
> Granted I am not commenting on the exact post, too much  to locate it 
> 
> exactly.
> still, speaking only for myself, I have continued to build upon and 
> find 
> dos solutions  without having to change operating systems for almost 
> 30 
> years now.  My choice  to think first about solutions instead of 
> thinking I 
> could not advance has yet to fail me.
> I am surprised on a list dedicated to a Dos program  at how often I 
> read 
> people suggest going to use something else laughs.
> I cannot speak to other  people's computing, but is not that why we 
> call them personal computers in the first place?
> Kare
> 
> 
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Rugxulo wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, dmccunney 
>  wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner 
>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to 
> use it.
> >>> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on 
> win 7.
> >>> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
> >>> or it would shut down forever.
> >>
> >> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?
> >
> > Can't you use a RC (release candidate) for a few months? Or is 
> that
> > not supported any longer?
> >
> >>> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, 
> it would
> >>> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.
> >
> > In fairness, Win7 doesn't have a lot of life left, so it's not a 
> good
> > long-term solution. (Vista very recently died, so no more updates 
> or
> > fixes.)
> >
> >> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
> >> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, 
> splendid.
> >> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will 
> mean
> >> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, 
> there's
> >> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more 
> about
> >> and better understand what your options are.
> >
> > I can't help but wonder if a simple Chromebook (from Best Buy, 
> etc.)
> > would fit the bill for him (or me or others). But without QEMU or
> > similar by default, it's probably less useful. Google probably 
> thinks
> > emulation would be overkill for the "light" tasks that Chromebooks
> > support. You can "probably" install a full Ubuntu (instead of 
> default
> > ChromeOS), but I'm not sure of the potential tradeoffs there 
> (battery
> > life?).
> >
> > A lot of issues with old DOS software have to do with printing, as 
> one
> > guy on BTTR recently mentioned needing. Not sure what is perfectly
> > ideal here (VDosPlus??). BTW, QEMU 2.9.0 was just released today 
> (but
> > I'm unaware of any relevant changes for us).
> >
> > Another long shot would be DOS emulation in the browser via
> > Javascript. Normally I would shun that for being too buggy or 
> slow,
> > but there are TONS of Javascript emulators. It's shocking 
> actually,
> > and some are amazingly good (and network-aware), e.g. OpenRISC. Of
> > course, DOS is not high priority, and copy.sh's V86 is still too
> > buggy, but we can dream, can't we?   ;-)
> >
> >> Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in 
> *both* feet.
> >
> > Shooting your foot off? Yes, C++17 was finalized recently.   :-))
> >
> > 
>
-
-
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > ___
> > Freedos-user mailing list
> > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> >
> >
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


13 Secrets Cruise Workers Don't Want You To Know
trend-chaser.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58fa12e0bd3fc12e04ff1st01duc

--
Check out the 

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

The win 7 was a 32 bit copy purchased on Amazon.
The software was a dvd converter to convert dvds to mp4.
It didn't work on XP so I wanted to try it on win 7; didn't work
there either. The 1st activation was slow painful and
successful. Win 7 gave warning about making changes.
I followed all instructions to the letter.
The message came from win 7. If you are connected
to wifi I think it does the reactivation automatically and
quietly.


cheers
DS


On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 16:58:06 -0400 dmccunney 
writes:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner  
> wrote:
> 
> > I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to 
> use it.
> 
> Where did you get the copy of Win7 you installed?
> 
> > The laptop doesn't have an internet connection so had to use the
> > phone method.to  Install it.
> 
> Are you certain that worked correctly?
> 
> > I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 
> 7.
> 
> What software was this?
> 
> > A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
> > or it would shut down forever.
> 
> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?
> 
> > I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it 
> would
> > do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.
> 
> I'm afraid my take from here is pilot error.  When you don't 
> actually
> know what you're doing, problems arise.
> 
> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will 
> mean
> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, 
> there's
> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
> and better understand what your options are.
> 
> Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in 
> *both* feet.
> 
> > cheers
> > DS
> __
> Dennis
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


Police Urge Americans to Carry This With Them at All Times
The Observer
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58fa107eebcb5107e4c43st03duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[dmccunney]

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Rugxulo  wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, dmccunney  wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:
>>
>>> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.
>>> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.
>>> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
>>> or it would shut down forever.
>>
>> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?
>
> Can't you use a RC (release candidate) for a few months? Or is that
> not supported any longer?

If what you *have* is a Release Candidate, maybe.  (I have no idea if
it is still supported.)

>>> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
>>> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.
>
> In fairness, Win7 doesn't have a lot of life left, so it's not a good
> long-term solution. (Vista very recently died, so no more updates or
> fixes.)

Win7 is no longer under active development. It *will* get Extended
Support (IE, security updates) till 2020, but MS would really like you
to move to Win10.

The bigger longer term problem is that each new release of Windows
adds new things to the Windows API, and as time passes, software will
expect that new stuff and fail to run on systems that don't have it.
I have an ancient notebook running Win2K Pro that can't run some stuff
I use elsewhere because it requires XP minimum.  There are already
things that require Win7 minimum and won't run on my XP Home netbook.

There are reasons I prefer to stay current on Windows...

>> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
>> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
>> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
>> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
>> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
>> and better understand what your options are.
>
> I can't help but wonder if a simple Chromebook (from Best Buy, etc.)
> would fit the bill for him (or me or others). But without QEMU or
> similar by default, it's probably less useful. Google probably thinks
> emulation would be overkill for the "light" tasks that Chromebooks
> support. You can "probably" install a full Ubuntu (instead of default
> ChromeOS), but I'm not sure of the potential tradeoffs there (battery
> life?).

That will depend on your needs.  Chromebooks explicitly assume you
have a fast internet connection and will store your data in the cloud.
If you have the first and are willing to do the latter, a Chromebook
can be a good fit.  If the answer is no to either of those questions,
think again.

And while there are options to install Ubuntu, you still face issues
of local storage capacity.  Battery like my not be your scarce
resource.

If I were to get a Chromebook, I wouldn't bother.  It's a platform to
connect to the Internet through broadband and do stuff via the Chrome
browser.  Stuff that can't be handled that way is Something Else's
Job.

(I can theoretically install Ubuntu on my Android tablet.  I have no
actual need to do so.  Android and the apps I have installed do what I
require.  Ubuntu won't add anything I need badly enough to justify the
effort of moving to it.)

> A lot of issues with old DOS software have to do with printing, as one
> guy on BTTR recently mentioned needing. Not sure what is perfectly
> ideal here (VDosPlus??). BTW, QEMU 2.9.0 was just released today (but
> I'm unaware of any relevant changes for us).

I have vDOSPlus here.  It's a possible solution for most print needs,
since you can configure what happens when you try to print from a DOS
app.  I never actually do, but I would redirect to a "printer" under
Windows that creates a PDF of what is sent to it, and print that using
standard Windows methods.

If you can *run* your DOS app in a virtual machine (which is
essentially what vDOS and predecessor DOSBox are), you can generally
find a way to actually print from the host OS. I very seldom need to
actually print *anything*, and largely don't care.

(I have several DOS apps and games running on my Android tablet
courtesy of an Android port of DOSBox.  One candidate for running that
way was Eric Meyer's DOS WordStar clone, VDE.  The problem was that
extant Android ports of DOSBox weren't passing control-key combos
through to the host OS, so WordStar  assignments simply
weren't recognized.  I found a port that does let them through and VDE
runs fine.)

> Another long shot would be DOS emulation in the browser via
> Javascript. Normally I would shun that for being too buggy or slow,
> but there are TONS of Javascript emulators. It's shocking actually,
> and some are amazingly good (and network-aware), e.g. OpenRISC. Of
> course, DOS is not high priority, and copy.sh's V86 is still too
> buggy, but we can dream, can't 

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Karen Lewellen]

Granted I am not commenting on the exact post, too much  to locate it 
exactly.
still, speaking only for myself, I have continued to build upon and find 
dos solutions  without having to change operating systems for almost 30 
years now.  My choice  to think first about solutions instead of thinking I 
could not advance has yet to fail me.
I am surprised on a list dedicated to a Dos program  at how often I read 
people suggest going to use something else laughs.
I cannot speak to other  people's computing, but is not that why we 
call them personal computers in the first place?
Kare


On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Rugxulo wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, dmccunney  wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:
>>
>>> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.
>>> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.
>>> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
>>> or it would shut down forever.
>>
>> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?
>
> Can't you use a RC (release candidate) for a few months? Or is that
> not supported any longer?
>
>>> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
>>> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.
>
> In fairness, Win7 doesn't have a lot of life left, so it's not a good
> long-term solution. (Vista very recently died, so no more updates or
> fixes.)
>
>> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
>> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
>> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
>> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
>> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
>> and better understand what your options are.
>
> I can't help but wonder if a simple Chromebook (from Best Buy, etc.)
> would fit the bill for him (or me or others). But without QEMU or
> similar by default, it's probably less useful. Google probably thinks
> emulation would be overkill for the "light" tasks that Chromebooks
> support. You can "probably" install a full Ubuntu (instead of default
> ChromeOS), but I'm not sure of the potential tradeoffs there (battery
> life?).
>
> A lot of issues with old DOS software have to do with printing, as one
> guy on BTTR recently mentioned needing. Not sure what is perfectly
> ideal here (VDosPlus??). BTW, QEMU 2.9.0 was just released today (but
> I'm unaware of any relevant changes for us).
>
> Another long shot would be DOS emulation in the browser via
> Javascript. Normally I would shun that for being too buggy or slow,
> but there are TONS of Javascript emulators. It's shocking actually,
> and some are amazingly good (and network-aware), e.g. OpenRISC. Of
> course, DOS is not high priority, and copy.sh's V86 is still too
> buggy, but we can dream, can't we?   ;-)
>
>> Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in *both* feet.
>
> Shooting your foot off? Yes, C++17 was finalized recently.   :-))
>
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
>

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, dmccunney  wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:
>
>> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.
>> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.
>> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
>> or it would shut down forever.
>
> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?

Can't you use a RC (release candidate) for a few months? Or is that
not supported any longer?

>> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
>> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.

In fairness, Win7 doesn't have a lot of life left, so it's not a good
long-term solution. (Vista very recently died, so no more updates or
fixes.)

> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
> and better understand what your options are.

I can't help but wonder if a simple Chromebook (from Best Buy, etc.)
would fit the bill for him (or me or others). But without QEMU or
similar by default, it's probably less useful. Google probably thinks
emulation would be overkill for the "light" tasks that Chromebooks
support. You can "probably" install a full Ubuntu (instead of default
ChromeOS), but I'm not sure of the potential tradeoffs there (battery
life?).

A lot of issues with old DOS software have to do with printing, as one
guy on BTTR recently mentioned needing. Not sure what is perfectly
ideal here (VDosPlus??). BTW, QEMU 2.9.0 was just released today (but
I'm unaware of any relevant changes for us).

Another long shot would be DOS emulation in the browser via
Javascript. Normally I would shun that for being too buggy or slow,
but there are TONS of Javascript emulators. It's shocking actually,
and some are amazingly good (and network-aware), e.g. OpenRISC. Of
course, DOS is not high priority, and copy.sh's V86 is still too
buggy, but we can dream, can't we?   ;-)

> Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in *both* feet.

Shooting your foot off? Yes, C++17 was finalized recently.   :-))

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[dmccunney]

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:

> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.

Where did you get the copy of Win7 you installed?

> The laptop doesn't have an internet connection so had to use the
> phone method.to  Install it.

Are you certain that worked correctly?

> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.

What software was this?

> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
> or it would shut down forever.

Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?

> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.

I'm afraid my take from here is pilot error.  When you don't actually
know what you're doing, problems arise.

You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
and better understand what your options are.

Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in *both* feet.

> cheers
> DS
__
Dennis

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to
use it. The laptop doesn't have an internet connection so had
to use the phone method.to  Install it. I installed software that I
bought to
see what it  would do on win 7. Alot of of message boxes came
up giving me 24 hours to reactive or it would shut down forever.
I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.



cheers
DS



On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 17:06:59 -0400 dmccunney 
writes:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Dale E Sterner  
> wrote:
> > With windows if your PC dies and you want to move
> > to a dupicate and keep running - your out of luck.
> 
> Not really.  Been there, done that.
> 
> On my old, built-from components PC, I moved XP several times.  I 
> made
> changes to the underlying system and Windows wanted to 
> reauthenticate.
> 
> The time before last, online authentication failed, and I wound up
> speaking to a Microsoft rep. His concern was solely that I wasn't
> trying to run the *same* copy of Windows on more than one machine at 
> a
> time.  "Nope.  Same physical machine.  I had a hardware failure and
> had to get a new motherboard."  He got me authenticated.
> 
> The next time I had to do so, online authentication worked with no
> issues - MS had made changes to the online authentication site, and
> whatever made it fail before no longer bit.
> 
> > Windows ability to detect small changes is amazing -
> > it just wants to stop.
> 
> Windows has an intimate relationship with the hardware.  It *is* an
> OS.  If you *make* hardware changes, it will notice.  Whether it 
> wants
> to stop will depend on the hardware you changed.  Video cards, hard
> drives, and RAM shouldn't cause a problem.  Motherboard changes 
> will.
> As far as Windows is concerned, that's a new machine.
> 
> > Win 7 is such a pain to deal with I think even DOS could beat it.
> 
> I've run Win7, and can't agree.  I was quite happy with Win7.  These
> days, I run Win10, and I'm generally pleased with it.  (I run the 
> Pro
> version in both cases.)
> 
> It follows the "every *other* release of Windows is decent" pattern.
> I avoided Vista like the plague, but was happy with Win7.  I avoided
> 8.1 but am generally pleased with Win10.
> 
> Of course, I have the hardware to properly support it, and know what 
> I'm doing.
> 
> The current desktop is a replacement for a failed older one.  The
> older one came with Win7, and I upgraded to Win10.  I'd done that on
> three laptops with no issues.  The desktop was "new and different
> Win10 BSODs - collect the whole set!", and I was.  The new machine 
> is
> rock solid and stable, but it's also faster and more powerful
> hardware.  My conclusion was that the older machine could run Win7 
> but
> wasn't really up to Win10, even though it would install without
> issues.  (One annoying quirk was that it was a quad-core machine but
> Win10 only saw two cores.  The Xeon CPU is used wasn't on the
> "supported by Win10 list Intel maintains.  The i5-2400 in the new 
> box
> is, and Win10 sees and uses all four cores.)
> 
> Something like that happened in the Win Vista days.  MS wanted
> everyone on Vista, but some of the hardware in the pipeline wasn't
> really up to running it.  (Mostly, inadequate video.)  MS created a
> new level of certification - Vista Capable - so hardware vendors 
> could
> put it on the box.  Jim Allchin, who was SVP in charge of Windows
> development at the time, was livid.  He felt, correctly, that the
> hardware would not provide a good experience for users and that MS
> would get yet another black eye in the marketplace.  MS really 
> should
> have waited 6 months for a new generation of hardware that would
> properly support Vista, but wanted to make XP go away.
> 
> > Every time I install new software it wants to be
> > reauthenticated.
> 
> Win7?  That never happened here.  Are you sure it got properly
> authenticated in the first place?
> 
> What new software triggers a request for reauthentication?
> __
> Dennis
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/105128793974319004519
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


Police Urge Americans to Carry This With Them at All Times
The Observer
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58f8bb84c98a33b844109st04duc

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[dmccunney]

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Gregg Eshelman  wrote:

> Microsoft has done such things deliberately. I had a Compaq server with dual
> slot Xeon CPUs. XP (with a 1-2 CPU license) could be installed but no matter
> what, was only going to be allowed to use ONE CPU. Manually forcing the
> multi CPU HAL to install during setup (or after) would make it crash.
> Microsoft apparently told Compaq to fix their server BIOSes so that only
> Server versions of Windows would be allowed to access the full hardware
> capabilities. So I put 2000 Server on it and got rid of it.

That's not a surprise.  Desktop systems with dual CPUs were uncommon.
The assumption was that a dual-CPU machine was a server, and would
require a server version of Windows.

Finding a dual-CPU system in current days of multiple cores pretty
much requires server hardware.  I dealt professionally with Dell 1u
rack mount servers.  They came with dual CPUs, we installed 32GB RAM
(the max it would take), and spun up VMs under VMWare.  (Mostly
CentOS, but a bit of Windows in the mix.)

With multiple cores per CPU, the *need* to have more than one CPU drops.

> One thing I've been liking about 10 is that just about any Core 2 Duo or
> dual core AMD AM2 and later can run it pretty well, even with only 2 gig
> RAM. A socket 939 AMD, even dual core? Not so much. 10 is the first release
> of Windows to have lower minimum hardware requirements than its predecessor.
> Just got done putting it on a 2.4Ghz Thinkpad T61 with 4gig (and a BIOS
> modded to remove hardware whitelist and de-hobble SATA from being limited to
> version 1 speed), which I'd seriously be thinking about keeping if it had
> the 1920x1200 instead of 1680x1050 display.

I'd be reluctant to try to run Win10 in 2GB, though it's nice you can.
6GB RAM seems to be the sweet spot.  The current desktop has 8GB, but
can be expanded to 32GB by swapping in higher capacity RAM sticks.

> I doubt any previous version of Windows would run well, if at all, on
> hardware originally released 8~9 years prior.

Depends on the Windows flavor.  I have an ancient notebook - a Fujitsu
p2110 from 2001.  It was a pass along from a friend who had upgraded,
but didn't want to just throw it out.

It came to me with Windows XP SP2, and took 8 minutes to just *boot*,
and longer to do anything.

No surprise.  The machine had a 787mhz Transmeta Crusoe CPU (an early
attempt at a power saving design), an IDE4 HD, and a whopping 256 *MB*
of RAM, of which the CPU grabbed 16MB off the top for code morphing.
XP wanted 512MB, minimum, to think about running.

I swapped in a larger HD, repartitioned, reformatted, and installed
Win2K SP4, Ubuntu Linux, Puppy7 Linux, and FreeDOS, multi-booting via
grub2.  Win2K actually ran on the machine more or less acceptably,
especially after I stripped out everything loaded in startup that
*could* be dropped, and turned off the Windows Update service (saving
10MB RAM) because the machine wouldn't *get* updates.

Ubuntu was installed from Minimal CD to get a working CLI system, and
then pick-and-choose via apt-get.  Lxde provided a lightweight GUI.
Large apps were problematic, but that was disk I/O issues caused by
IDE4.  I didn't even try to run Firefox.  Puppy was intended for low
end hardware and ran well, but with the same caveats about big apps.
FreeDOS flew. :-)

It was mostly an exercise to see what performance I could wring out of
ancient hardware *without* throwing money at it.  Actual work happened
elsewhere.  It hasn't even been turned on in months.

> Need USB 3 and/or eSATA? Pop in an ExpressCard.

That's a future upgrade here.  The current machine is USB2, but
there's a four port USB3 card from about $25 that ill plug into the
mini PCI-e slot. Little I currently do really needs USB3, but it's an
easy add down the road.

> Put Classic Shell on, turn off all the stuff that phones home, set the
> window titlebars to a color instead of white (which Firefox ignores) and
> it's good to go.

I run Classic Shell here, and turned off the telemetry as well.

> If you've ever done anything with Windows 1.0 you should notice some
> similarities between it and the "Modern" UI. They both have non-overlapping
> tiles with active content, and there's this black bar across the bottom.
> Square corners everywhere (excepting the round ended buttons Apple sued MS
> over, square cornered buttons were made to satisfy Apple). Flat, saturated
> colors with a heavy emphasis on white, magenta, cyan and black. "3D"
> effects? Not there, just like Windows was through 3.0.
>
> Someone at MS has a bad case of nostalgia for Windows 1.0 running on a CGA
> monitor.

  I avoided the Metro UI, reasons why.

MS had the same dream that Ubuntu Linux had with their Unity desktop -
the same UI on any device the user ran.  But a UI suited for a tablet
where screen real estate is the scarce resource falls down in a big
monitor.  Win10 brought back the Start Menu, but fixed what wasn't
broken and 

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Gregg Eshelman]

Microsoft has done such things deliberately. I had a Compaq server with dual 
slot Xeon CPUs. XP (with a 1-2 CPU license) could be installed but no matter 
what, was only going to be allowed to use ONE CPU. Manually forcing the multi 
CPU HAL to install during setup (or after) would make it crash.
Microsoft apparently told Compaq to fix their server BIOSes so that only Server 
versions of Windows would be allowed to access the full hardware capabilities. 
So I put 2000 Server on it and got rid of it.
One thing I've been liking about 10 is that just about any Core 2 Duo or dual 
core AMD AM2 and later can run it pretty well, even with only 2 gig RAM. A 
socket 939 AMD, even dual core? Not so much. 10 is the first release of Windows 
to have lower minimum hardware requirements than its predecessor. Just got done 
putting it on a 2.4Ghz Thinkpad T61 with 4gig (and a BIOS modded to remove 
hardware whitelist and de-hobble SATA from being limited to version 1 speed), 
which I'd seriously be thinking about keeping if it had the 1920x1200 instead 
of 1680x1050 display. Need USB 3 and/or eSATA? Pop in an ExpressCard.

I doubt any previous version of Windows would run well, if at all, on hardware 
originally released 8~9 years prior.

Put Classic Shell on, turn off all the stuff that phones home, set the window 
titlebars to a color instead of white (which Firefox ignores) and it's good to 
go.
If you've ever done anything with Windows 1.0 you should notice some 
similarities between it and the "Modern" UI. They both have non-overlapping 
tiles with active content, and there's this black bar across the bottom. Square 
corners everywhere (excepting the round ended buttons Apple sued MS over, 
square cornered buttons were made to satisfy Apple). Flat, saturated colors 
with a heavy emphasis on white, magenta, cyan and black. "3D" effects? Not 
there, just like Windows was through 3.0.

Someone at MS has a bad case of nostalgia for Windows 1.0 running on a CGA 
monitor.

On Wednesday, April 19, 2017, 3:09:07 PM MDT, dmccunney 
 wrote:On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Dale E 
Sterner  wrote:
> With windows if your PC dies and you want to move
> to a dupicate and keep running - your out of luck.

(One annoying quirk was that it was a quad-core machine but
Win10 only saw two cores.  The Xeon CPU is used wasn't on the
"supported by Win10 list Intel maintains.  The i5-2400 in the new box
is, and Win10 sees and uses all four cores.)

Something like that happened in the Win Vista days.  MS wanted
everyone on Vista, but some of the hardware in the pipeline wasn't
really up to running it.  (Mostly, inadequate video.)  MS created a
new level of certification - Vista Capable - so hardware vendors could
put it on the box.  Jim Allchin, who was SVP in charge of Windows
development at the time, was livid.  He felt, correctly, that the
hardware would not provide a good experience for users and that MS
would get yet another black eye in the marketplace.  MS really should
have waited 6 months for a new generation of hardware that would
properly support Vista, but wanted to make XP go away.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[dmccunney]

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:
> With windows if your PC dies and you want to move
> to a dupicate and keep running - your out of luck.

Not really.  Been there, done that.

On my old, built-from components PC, I moved XP several times.  I made
changes to the underlying system and Windows wanted to reauthenticate.

The time before last, online authentication failed, and I wound up
speaking to a Microsoft rep. His concern was solely that I wasn't
trying to run the *same* copy of Windows on more than one machine at a
time.  "Nope.  Same physical machine.  I had a hardware failure and
had to get a new motherboard."  He got me authenticated.

The next time I had to do so, online authentication worked with no
issues - MS had made changes to the online authentication site, and
whatever made it fail before no longer bit.

> Windows ability to detect small changes is amazing -
> it just wants to stop.

Windows has an intimate relationship with the hardware.  It *is* an
OS.  If you *make* hardware changes, it will notice.  Whether it wants
to stop will depend on the hardware you changed.  Video cards, hard
drives, and RAM shouldn't cause a problem.  Motherboard changes will.
As far as Windows is concerned, that's a new machine.

> Win 7 is such a pain to deal with I think even DOS could beat it.

I've run Win7, and can't agree.  I was quite happy with Win7.  These
days, I run Win10, and I'm generally pleased with it.  (I run the Pro
version in both cases.)

It follows the "every *other* release of Windows is decent" pattern.
I avoided Vista like the plague, but was happy with Win7.  I avoided
8.1 but am generally pleased with Win10.

Of course, I have the hardware to properly support it, and know what I'm doing.

The current desktop is a replacement for a failed older one.  The
older one came with Win7, and I upgraded to Win10.  I'd done that on
three laptops with no issues.  The desktop was "new and different
Win10 BSODs - collect the whole set!", and I was.  The new machine is
rock solid and stable, but it's also faster and more powerful
hardware.  My conclusion was that the older machine could run Win7 but
wasn't really up to Win10, even though it would install without
issues.  (One annoying quirk was that it was a quad-core machine but
Win10 only saw two cores.  The Xeon CPU is used wasn't on the
"supported by Win10 list Intel maintains.  The i5-2400 in the new box
is, and Win10 sees and uses all four cores.)

Something like that happened in the Win Vista days.  MS wanted
everyone on Vista, but some of the hardware in the pipeline wasn't
really up to running it.  (Mostly, inadequate video.)  MS created a
new level of certification - Vista Capable - so hardware vendors could
put it on the box.  Jim Allchin, who was SVP in charge of Windows
development at the time, was livid.  He felt, correctly, that the
hardware would not provide a good experience for users and that MS
would get yet another black eye in the marketplace.  MS really should
have waited 6 months for a new generation of hardware that would
properly support Vista, but wanted to make XP go away.

> Every time I install new software it wants to be
> reauthenticated.

Win7?  That never happened here.  Are you sure it got properly
authenticated in the first place?

What new software triggers a request for reauthentication?
__
Dennis
https://plus.google.com/u/0/105128793974319004519

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

With windows if your PC dies and you want to move
to a dupicate and keep running - your out of luck.
Windows ability to detect small changes is amazing -
it just wants to stop. Win 7 is such a pain to
deal with I think even DOS could beat it.
Every time I install new software it wants to be
reauthenticated. 

cheers
DS


On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:57:35 -0400 dmccunney 
writes:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Dale E Sterner  
> wrote:
> 
> > Maybe the people who have produced the mini
> > also wrote some software to make it useful.
> 
> Sorry, but that's wishful thinking.  The HP mini wasn't issued as a
> DOS machine.  FreeDOS was an after the fact addition on the one you
> saw, not original equipment.
> 
> > I like DOS I hope it moves foreward.
> 
> It won't.  What will move it?  What you would like to see will 
> require
> time and effort by highly skilled programmers.  The folks who *can* 
> do
> what you want expect to be *paid* for their work.  Who will pay 
> them,
> and why?  There hasn't been a paying market for DOS and DOS software
> for decades.
> 
> > Windows is so single PC oriented. I've tried moving
> > windows to a twin PC - same everything and it
> > somehow knew it was different and didn't
> > want to run.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by "twin PC".  But Windows is licensed to 
> a
> single PC.   Want to run it on the second PC?  Get another copy of
> Windows with a different license key..
> 
> One reason for using Linux is that it doesn't care, and you can
> install it from the same distribution media on multiple machines.
> 
> > DOS has no such problems. DOS finds its legs and wants to run.
> 
> And if what you want to do can be done by DOS, you are fine.
> Increasingly, what you might want to do *can't* be done under DOS.
> You have a choice of staying put and forgoing the new stuff, or 
> moving
> to a different OS.
> __
> Dennis
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


Police Urge Americans to Carry This With Them at All Times
The Observer
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58f7c59dccd50459d30cbst02duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[dmccunney]

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:

> Maybe the people who have produced the mini
> also wrote some software to make it useful.

Sorry, but that's wishful thinking.  The HP mini wasn't issued as a
DOS machine.  FreeDOS was an after the fact addition on the one you
saw, not original equipment.

> I like DOS I hope it moves foreward.

It won't.  What will move it?  What you would like to see will require
time and effort by highly skilled programmers.  The folks who *can* do
what you want expect to be *paid* for their work.  Who will pay them,
and why?  There hasn't been a paying market for DOS and DOS software
for decades.

> Windows is so single PC oriented. I've tried moving
> windows to a twin PC - same everything and it
> somehow knew it was different and didn't
> want to run.

I'm not sure what you mean by "twin PC".  But Windows is licensed to a
single PC.   Want to run it on the second PC?  Get another copy of
Windows with a different license key..

One reason for using Linux is that it doesn't care, and you can
install it from the same distribution media on multiple machines.

> DOS has no such problems. DOS finds its legs and wants to run.

And if what you want to do can be done by DOS, you are fine.
Increasingly, what you might want to do *can't* be done under DOS.
You have a choice of staying put and forgoing the new stuff, or moving
to a different OS.
__
Dennis

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Ulrich Hansen]

Several years ago I wrote everything I could find out about DOS and Wifi here:

http://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/WiFi

If anybody finds out more about it, please give some feedback...


> On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:07:35 -0400 dmccunney 
> writes:
>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dale E Sterner 
>>  wrote:
>>> I see that someone on Ebay is selling an HP mini
>>> with a FREEDOS os installed. All the HP minis that
>>> I've seen have wifi & bluetooth built in. That would
>>> mean an 802.11 client to do it. The ad doesn't
>>> mention wifi or bluetooth but every mini that I've seen
>>> has it.
>> 
>> The machine may have the *hardware*.  Whether the hardware will be
>> *usable* will depend on software.
>> 
>> MSDOS was written back before Wifi and Bluetooth *existed*.  FreeDOS
>> tries to be compatible with MSDOS, which means "support for what
>> existed when MSDOS was current."
>> 
>> I would *not* expect Wifi or Bluetooth to be usable on the machine 
>> in
>> FreeDOS, because the drivers don't exist.  If you want to use Wifi 
>> or
>> Bluetooth on that hardware, you'll need to install another OS that
>> supports them.  (Depending on exactly which HP mini model it is, 
>> there
>> might be a flavor of Linux that can do it.)
>> __
>> Dennis
>> 
>> 
> -
> -
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> ___
>> Freedos-user mailing list
>> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>> 
> 
> 
> **
>> From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
> ***
> 
> 
> The Easiest Way To Shed Deep Fat?
> 3 Harmful Foods
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58f7bb5e84cae3b5e7b11st02duc
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

Maybe the people who have produced the mini
also wrote some software to make it useful.
I like DOS I hope it moves foreward. Windows
is so single PC oriented. I've tried moving
windows to a twin PC - same everything and it
somehow knew it was different and didn't
want to run. DOS has no such problems.
DOS finds its legs and wants to run.


cheers
DS


On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:07:35 -0400 dmccunney 
writes:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dale E Sterner 
>  wrote:
> > I see that someone on Ebay is selling an HP mini
> > with a FREEDOS os installed. All the HP minis that
> > I've seen have wifi & bluetooth built in. That would
> > mean an 802.11 client to do it. The ad doesn't
> > mention wifi or bluetooth but every mini that I've seen
> > has it.
> 
> The machine may have the *hardware*.  Whether the hardware will be
> *usable* will depend on software.
> 
> MSDOS was written back before Wifi and Bluetooth *existed*.  FreeDOS
> tries to be compatible with MSDOS, which means "support for what
> existed when MSDOS was current."
> 
> I would *not* expect Wifi or Bluetooth to be usable on the machine 
> in
> FreeDOS, because the drivers don't exist.  If you want to use Wifi 
> or
> Bluetooth on that hardware, you'll need to install another OS that
> supports them.  (Depending on exactly which HP mini model it is, 
> there
> might be a flavor of Linux that can do it.)
> __
> Dennis
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


The Easiest Way To Shed Deep Fat?
3 Harmful Foods
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58f7bb5e84cae3b5e7b11st02duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[dmccunney]

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:
> I see that someone on Ebay is selling an HP mini
> with a FREEDOS os installed. All the HP minis that
> I've seen have wifi & bluetooth built in. That would
> mean an 802.11 client to do it. The ad doesn't
> mention wifi or bluetooth but every mini that I've seen
> has it.

The machine may have the *hardware*.  Whether the hardware will be
*usable* will depend on software.

MSDOS was written back before Wifi and Bluetooth *existed*.  FreeDOS
tries to be compatible with MSDOS, which means "support for what
existed when MSDOS was current."

I would *not* expect Wifi or Bluetooth to be usable on the machine in
FreeDOS, because the drivers don't exist.  If you want to use Wifi or
Bluetooth on that hardware, you'll need to install another OS that
supports them.  (Depending on exactly which HP mini model it is, there
might be a flavor of Linux that can do it.)
__
Dennis

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Dale E Sterner]

I see that someone on Ebay is selling an HP mini
with a FREEDOS os installed. All the HP minis that
I've seen have wifi & bluetooth built in. That would
mean an 802.11 client to do it. The ad doesn't
mention wifi or bluetooth but every mini that I've seen
has it.


cheers
DS



On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 10:50:04 + (UTC) Mateusz Viste
 writes:
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 10:37:44 -0400, Dale E Sterner wrote:
> > Would you or anyone else know if there is an 802.11 client for 
> dos?
> > Never heard of one but you guys know alot more than I ever will.
> 
> I don't think there is such thing as a "802.11 client" - it only 
> depends 
> whether or not the given wifi card has a driver for DOS.
> 
> I know that there are (old) wifi network cards with DOS 
> compatibility, 
> but these are usually restricted to WEP encryption, which is very 
> weak.
> 
> A probably better solution (that I use myself) is too use a classic 
> Ethernet network card with DOS, and hook it to some wifi AP in 
> bridge 
> mode. When considering what network card to use, I like to compare 
> the 
> memory footprint of its packet packet driver. For example the packet 
> 
> driver of an RTL8139 consumes 26K of RAM, while the packet driver of 
> a 
> 3C590 needs only 11K.
> 
> Mateusz
> 
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


Why Your City Doctors No Longer Prescribe Metformin
Vibrant Health Network
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58f77e9be78bc7e9b1e3ast01duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of your files)

[Mateusz Viste]

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 10:37:44 -0400, Dale E Sterner wrote:
> Would you or anyone else know if there is an 802.11 client for dos?
> Never heard of one but you guys know alot more than I ever will.

I don't think there is such thing as a "802.11 client" - it only depends 
whether or not the given wifi card has a driver for DOS.

I know that there are (old) wifi network cards with DOS compatibility, 
but these are usually restricted to WEP encryption, which is very weak.

A probably better solution (that I use myself) is too use a classic 
Ethernet network card with DOS, and hook it to some wifi AP in bridge 
mode. When considering what network card to use, I like to compare the 
memory footprint of its packet packet driver. For example the packet 
driver of an RTL8139 consumes 26K of RAM, while the packet driver of a 
3C590 needs only 11K.

Mateusz


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user