Slashdot Mirror
FreeDOS Turns 10 Years Old Today
Jim Hall writes "The FreeDOS Project turns 10 years old today! PD-DOS was announced to the world on June 28, 1994. The PD-DOS project was later renamed to the FreeDOS Project. We've come a long way in 10 years. Today, FreeDOS is ideal for anyone who wants to bundle a version of DOS without having to pay a royalty for use of DOS. FreeDOS will also work on old hardware, in DOS emulators, and in embedded systems. FreeDOS is also an invaluable resource for people who would like to develop their own operating system. While there are many free operating systems out there, no other free DOS-compatible operating system exists. Read more about the FreeDOS Project history in the About FreeDOS page."
DOS is still alive as a great platform for limited uses.
If you need some utilities to go along with freeDOS, try my site, Old Os or if you have problems setting it up try our forums.
Jay | http://oldos.org
FreeDOS aims to be a complete, free, 100% MS-DOS compatible operating system.
FreeDOS was previously known as "Free-DOS" and originally as "PD-DOS." For a little trip down memory lane: In 1994, I was a physics student at the University of Wisconsin-River Falls. Most of my work for school had been done using DOS - writing programs, dialing up to the university computer, network, analysing lab data, etc. I really loved DOS; I did everything with it. I had a '386 desktop system in my dorm room and an XT laptop that I would carry around with me to do work "on the go".
I liked the simplicity that DOS offered. As a DOS user, you have the equivalent of 'root' access on your computer. Anything that you want to do on the PC is possible. Nothing is really stopping you, other than hardware limitations. I found that this additional degree of freedom was nice to have, although since I worked in both environments (UNIX and DOS) I tended to write programs that stuck to "safe areas" that worked on both platforms. DOS was great.
But that year, there was an announcement that Microsoft would stop support for DOS, that a new version of Windows was going to be released that completely removed DOS from the picture. Of course, this was Windows 95, and it still did have DOS, but at that time we all had the vision that Microsoft was trying to kill our favorite operating system. Everyone was pretty shocked. We didn't want to be forced to use Windows, which completely removes the command line. In DOS, everything is done on the command line, and a true command line "guru" can do amazing things there. In Windows, you are stuck with the mouse, and if the menus don't let you do something, it pretty much can't be done. So things were looking pretty bleak. We were all very upset about Microsoft's decision to ditch the DOS platform.
Then, I saw a discussion thread on the DOS groups asking "hey, why doesn't someone write their own free version of DOS?" Remember, this was about three years after Linus Torvalds announced his work on the Linux kernel, and by 1993 Linux had shown that free software can achieve incredible results. So in 1994, the suggestion that we could write our own free version of DOS, and give it away with the source code so others could work with it and improve it, really didn't sound all that far-fetched.
Unfortunately, no one seemed to pick up the ball. The idea sort of sat there, waiting. I didn't have much experience in writing C or Assembly programs (most of my analytical work in physics was limited to FORTRAN) but I had written some C programs. So I sat down one weekend and hacked out code for a bunch of DOS file utilities. I posted what I had done to the DOS newsgroups, and announced that I intended to form a group on the Internet to write our own free version of DOS.
I took the opportunity to fix some things. There are some things about what Microsoft did with DOS that do irk me. The biggest is that MS-DOS commands lack options, not that there are lots of MS-DOS commands anyway. I wanted to have more powerful tools than what MS-DOS provided me with. So I hacked some of my own. (I wasn't a strong C programmer at the time, so this wasn't very beautiful code.)
There were several "beta" pre-release packages of my stuff:
Afte
Get paid to search..It's geniune and
Actually the name comes from QDOS, the Quick and Dirty Operating System. Seriously.
That's where you use DOSBox, a DOS emulator (mainly) for old games. It doesn't play all dos games yet but every release gets better.
Unfortunately without VMWaare's fancy graphics drivers that don't work when the guest OS is DOS it was too slow to play the old game I was interested in (MOO 1).
(But, DOSBox worked once I played with frameskip!)
I think it's cool that we have these options today.
Runs Descent, Descent2, Jazz Jackrabbit and One Must Fall 2097 for me. Although DOS4GW doesn't work on it, but you can replace the extender with the Zurenava DOS Extender, for example.
The site's in Russian, but it's simple to use. You run it on the game executable to replace the extender it uses. After that it works fine. Some games seem to lock up on exit on my laptop, but everything works fine during play, so it shouldn't be a huge problem.
FD has been quite useable for many years. The fact its not reached 1.0 is mainly due to debates on optional features needed to call it '1.0', and not related at all to its stablity or useablity.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Games is why I use FreeDOS on my laptop (dual-boot with Slackware 9.1).
What I have on it now, which works: Boloball, Bridge, Checkkers, Civilization, Hexjump, Texas Hold'em, Battle for Atlantis, VGA Joust, Larn, Bugs, Othello, Starcon-1, Wari, WarZone, XCom, XCom Terror from the Deep.
What doesn't work: Warcraft-2.
What I have somewhere but haven't installed/tried under FreeDOS yet: Warcraft-1, Descent-I/II/III, Quake
-- TTK
If one of those users wanted "complete control" of the computer - all they have to do is reboot the computer with an OS on a bootable CD (Knoppix, Gnoppix, etc). This can be done to take control of Linux, Win2K, WinXP, etc. NTFS is no obstacle, nor are the myriad of file systems available for use by a Linux installation. Encrypted file systems can prevent root access - but very few people have the time for this setup - plus recovery can be a real beatch.
The strong point of DOS is not being able to run another OS - it's being able to have more control over how you run certain applications. It can also facilitate recovery when things go wrong. The hardware requirements are less. Flexibility is a good thing. There is no need to port legacy apps that have been working flawlessly for years.
I personally dont use FreeDOS - I still have a Win98 partition with DOS installed. If I didn't own Win98 - FreeDOS is something I would explore for the rare occasions I would want to play old-school games.
DOS 6.22 (unsupported) can be downloaded free from: Micro$oft.com
You'll also find it on =80486 webservers. And yes, they do exist.
FreeDOS will run on DOSEmu on Linux.
DOSBox seems aimed more at games than general applications, which seems to explain why some of the nicer points of freeDOS (such as printing/netprint support) don't seem to work as well/easily in dosbox. Easier to setup though, and good for some of the stuff that dosEMU doesn't handle as well yet.
DOSBOX only does 286. There are a good number of DOS games that need a 386. (My favorite, Wolfenstein 3-D, isn't one of them; it runs just fine on a 286. I actually use DOSBOX to test my hacks on Wolf3D.)
Moll.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
That post wasn't flamebait - it's a reasonable question.
Here's one example -- Steve Gibson released a new version of his SpinRite hard disk test/recovery tool. grc.com It uses FreeDOS so you can boot from a floppy and test every sector.
[I haven't tried the product, just noting one relevant modern use of DOS.]
On a cover CD I got with a PC mag of mine (Atomic MPC, Aussie Mag) they had a full media bootable CD. It was based on knoppix and had support for getting video from networked PC's (ic. wireless) PC tuner, HDD recorder (HDD wasnt needed to run, but it could save stuff to em), play DVD's / SVCD's / the rest of it.
It could be fully loaded to RAM if you had enough, and you could add media to the CD or use a different CD.
It was created for media set top boxes, and having a stuff around on my desktop it looked pretty good.
Im sure if you looked around Knoppix sites there would be something similar online.
Not yet. I have run 3.00a in 286 mode, however, but it's highly crashprone. I think a lot of the devs don't think it's worth the bother aiming for Win3.x compatibility, but if it don't run Windows 3.1x, it ain't 100% compatible...
Moll.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
I have developed many systems running in DOS. A TSR will do pretty good when task scheduling isn't a big problem. But I do miss a good command interpreter. It's much quicker to write "ls *", rather than setting up the structures and calling the functions that read a directory in C. Wait... Is there Perl for freeDOS?
../bin directory in your path, you can use the utilities in a Win9x/XP command prompt. Its called as a batch file, and its like SSHing into your own machine. it has a virtual directory structure that gives you full access to your whole drive or its own / structure under its windows path (safe), and most of the useful Unix utilities.
Then just use Linux, or if you strongly prefer Windows, use Cygwin. I use both equally. Perl is a standard package in Cygwin (have to select it, tho) or you can install Perl in Windows with several different binary ports.
For those of you that are unfamiliar with Cygwin (cygwin.com), its a Unix like environment for Windows. It takes up one directory and if you put the
The setup program lets you install Perl, GCC, plus other languages and compilers, and even an Xserver, although my luck with that is not so good. Even if you are a Windows only user, its a great way to get introduced to a fairly powerful shell, with several options like tch and bash, without the problems of a dual boot.
It is NOT "Linux in Windows", its a set of APIs to be able to compile and run many Linux programs from source, with just a few mouse clicks to install the most common programs. Find it here. It's Free.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Yes, dosemu needs a DOS to host. The standard Dos distributed with dosemu is freedos. Next question please.
That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
Free os/360? wait no more (run it on the Hercules emulator on your pc) Some FreeNeXTSTEP would rock too!
I've had better luck running games in newer versions of DOSemu. I'm running a 2.4 Ghz PIV and I couldn't get a decent framerate in anything I tried in DOSbox. DOSemu ran almost everything I threw at it acceptably. The biggie was Carmageddon.
I'll keep trying new releases. Either it will improve or I'll come into a machine fast enough to emulate a P75 with it. The following specs seem to cover all the ground needed to play games before the Win95 era began.
Pentium 75
Soundblaster AWE32
32 MB RAM
Trio64/VESA/CGA/EGA graphics
I'd estimate my current setup is closer to a P60 than a P75. The only fly in the ointment with DOSemu is that the OPL2/3 and wavetable stuff of the day may be spotty; you'll get sound effects but good luck with the music.
The only rights to DOS Seattle Computer Products retained was the right to sell copies with hardware ("Expert C Programming", Lindauer, pg.169). The licensed versions of DOS were OEM versions (using the OAK - OEM Adaptation Kit). Basically, they were just branded with the "big guys" name and copyright, and in some cases included code to contend with non-100% IBM PC compatible hardware.
The bash.exe from the Free Software Foundation's "GNU Tools for MSDOS" cd and book should work just fine, as long as you have a memory manager.
I know someone who ran the FSF's bash.exe through an exe-to-com converter, and then named it command.com. It worked, and viruses which typically depend on jumping to particular place in command.com to run something now failed. However, I believe Word Perfect 5.1 also would not run.
from the webpage... MS-DOS 7.10 is the best and the most up-to-date version of MS-DOS in the world, and it's also the most powerful, useful and high-performance DOS today (besides GNU GPLed FreeDOS). Thanks Microsoft! BESIDES GNU GPLED FREEDOS. NOWHERE on the page does it say that MS-DOS is released under the GPL. As if Bill would actually give anything away.
The last time FreeDOS had a real distribution release was two years ago. Looking forward to 1.0 is all well and good, but a Beta 9 (sans the ugly graphical installer of the latest "we'll call it RC even though we would never consider actually releasing this as B9" releases, perhaps?) would certainly be nice.
That's a Step-Up version. Step-Up is the MS-DOS equivalent of Upgrade editions of Windows. It requires DOS to already be installed.
Its an illegal Chinese hack. Works pretty good. Love their Win3.11 on a floppy, makes a great rescue disk.
Apparently Asus distributes an emergency disc with a BIOS image, and flashing tools, that runs FreeDOS. I know this because FreeDOS has a big warning on their front page that there's a problem with Asus' copy of it - basically, it'll fark your MBR if you try to install FreeDOS from it.
I just did a bootable 1.44MB FreeDOS floppy that plays mp3/ogg files with MPXplay, and then put it on to a bootable CD-ROM with all the music content I like. Voila, free, open source, standalone car/home/whatever music player which does not need a hard drive (for swapping). Just boot from ATAPI CD-drive and play some tunes, even at your friend's house!
Now try to do that with Linux/Windows/*BSD.
I did it three years ago:
http://freshmeat.net/projects/mjbd/
Do you have ESP?
It isn't quite an OS, but GNUStep comes closest to being a FreeNeXTSTEP...
In 1986, Seattle Computer was going out of business and planned to sell it's right to print DOS to a large vendor like Compaq. This lead to a lawsuit, and eventually a settlement where Microsoft bought them out for about $1 Mill. ("Hard Drive", Wallace & Erickson, 1992)
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Actually, yes, Cypress has a very good USB mass storage driver:
DUSE driver
and there are a couple of others if you look.
Tell that to Dell, yo. They ship FreeDOS on some of their boxes.
Since our church uses three programs that don't run on Slackware, I had to replace it with Win 2k Professional, which is decently stable and fits our needs. Well, I had one XP boot disk that booted into Windows ME (shudder), no utilities, and no way to access two CD-ROM drives that I needed to install 2k from.
To the rescue? Nothing less than Free FDISK and a Win98SE floppy with generic IDE drivers.
One MySQL client and a Win 2k installation later, and everything looks on track. Who says you don't need DOS anymore? (ahem... Microsoft...)
Thanks for another rescue, folks at FreeDOS!
-Rob
Marriage doesn't have to suck!
I take it these are the same drivers ? http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10215
DOS is a true RTOS. If you want mission critical and fast, DOS does it. It can boot up in seconds, it's fault tolerant (reboot=fixed) and had full direct hardware access.
I have run a lot of operating systems. QNX claims to be an RTOS, Windows CE Claims to be an RTOS, neither are as responsive as DOS.
There is no stupid hour glass in DOS. Batch files make automation a piece of cake, and you don't need a degree in Computer Science to write one.
There are players for all your wonderful media types available. There are also a number of classic game emulators (Genesyst, Nesticle, etc.) available as well.
So, next time that video poker game sitting on the counter at your local bar goes kaput, just remember, it's still running DOS.... turn it off (unplug it?) and turn it back on, you'll doo the next poor drunk a big favor.
Thank you, have a nice day.
Make America grate again!
I use MagicISO.
I wonder how freedos will deal with 64 bit CPUs. I just read that Intel's 64bit CPU will no longer support virtual x86 sessions anymore. So this means no more DOS. Will FreeDOS deal with it?
Intel IA64 chips can emulate x86, AMD64 (and Intel's clones) supports x86 natively. Unless you enter long mode, it will act as fast 16-bit/32-bit CPU.There *is* a tcp/ip stack for dos.
No, there are tcp/ip stacks for dos. Some of them are TSR programs, some are statically linked libraries. And each of them have unique configuration mechanism.I have heard of Dos Routers and firewalls
I know two - IPRoute and Internet Extender (I was using it at home before switching to Linux router).To quote another poster here on slashdot:
FD has been quite useable for many years. The fact its not reached 1.0 is mainly due to debates on optional features needed to call it '1.0', and not related at all to its stablity or useablity.