Slashdot Mirror


30-Year-Old Operating System 'PC-MOS/386' Finally Open Sourced (github.com)

PC-MOS/386 "was a multi-user, computer multitasking operating system...announced at COMDEX in November 1986," remembers Wikipedia, saying it runs many MS-DOS titles (though it's optimized for the Intel 80386 processor).

Today Slashdot user Roeland Jansen writes: After some tracking, racing and other stuff...PC-MOS/386 v5.01 is open source under GPLv3. Back in May he'd posted to a virtualization site that "I still have the source tapes. I want(ed) to make it GPL and while I got an OK on it, I haven't had time nor managed to get it legalized. E.g. lift the NDA and be able to publish."

1987 magazine ads described it as "the gateway to the latest technology...and your networking future," and 30 years later its release on GitHub includes sources and executables. "In concert with Gary Robertson and Rod Roark it has been decided to place all under GPL v3."

173 comments

  1. Revealing my age. by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I actually tried to make that POS work (to run a multiuser dial in host) back in the late 80s.

    Run away, stunk to heaven. IIRC only worked with _one_ rs232 UART (which had to do all the buffering in hardware). Didn't work well with that one. Just no. Waste of effort and money.

    I should not remember those details...my brain's garbage collection is very lazy.

    I'll download a copy, but only to burn it onto CDs to shoot at. Shades of '30-06 retiring' netmare 2.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    1. Re:Revealing my age. by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One more thing: The docs were worse than useless, why it stuck in my head. Unless they archived and included their BBS forums, it's truly a waste of storage space.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Revealing my age. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wish someone would open source this instead..

    3. Re:Revealing my age. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like so many of these, good in theory but unstable.

    4. Re:Revealing my age. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it doesn't have an NSA backdoor. . . Yet.

    5. Re:Revealing my age. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      It was the same year I first heard the phone metadata database rumor (the NSA knows who you know...anybody you've repeatedly called...world's largest database...etc)

      At the time the NSA had to have had tapes shipped to them monthly, from many local TelCos, which was hard to keep quiet.

      Strangely, for all the noise about Metadata, nobody in DC has asked anybody when it started...I'm guessing about 1920-1930. Kept on file cards at first.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:Revealing my age. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are off by a few years.

    7. Re:Revealing my age. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like so many of these, good in theory but unstable.

      I helped run a 2-node Wildcat/DESQview BBS for almost 10 years. We had no problems with DESQview that I can recall.

    8. Re:Revealing my age. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love the review, this is why I still read this Ad engine website.

    9. Re:Revealing my age. by bgmacaw · · Score: 0

      I worked in tech support Software Link and maintained the BBS way back then. At one point I had a backup of the forums but I probably tossed it out with my 3.5" floppy collection years ago. I guess I should have kept it around. Supporting PC/MOS was a nightmare. Fielding calls all day from angry users and vendors was very stressful and frustrating. 30 years later, I still hate answering the phone.

    10. Re:Revealing my age. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I don't know what value anybody can get from PC-MOS. Should just let it decompose in peace.

      I apologize belatedly for the tone of my posts all those years ago. I am generally pretty civil on the phone though.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  2. GPL DOS by BeerCat · · Score: 1

    So, there is now a GPL operating system that will run DOS applications. That's pretty interesting.

    If there were still sufficient "must have" DOS applications that could benefit from a little source code tweaking ("because I can!")

    --
    "She's furniture with a pulse"
    1. Re:GPL DOS by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

      So, there is now a GPL operating system that will run DOS applications. That's pretty interesting.

      You mean, besides FreeDOS?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:GPL DOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FreeDOS?

    3. Re:GPL DOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was reading about FreeDOS recently and it got me thinking (again) about those wonderful applications we had back then.

      How is the copyright of those? I'm talking about things which were cool back in the 1980s -- not only games, but serious applications, too.

      There was one particular program which would zoom/unzoom at the press of a key. I'd like one such feature to exist in Google Maps, for instance. BTW, I'm not coding this, but a nifty idea would be implementing a power function acceleration for the mousewheel, too (I guess that would do it).

      Or Xtree Gold, which was pure gold (duh!). I may revisit some alternative implementations for Linux soon, but XTG was beyond amazing.

    4. Re:GPL DOS by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, there is now a GPL operating system that will run DOS applications. That's pretty interesting.

      If there were still sufficient "must have" DOS applications that could benefit from a little source code tweaking ("because I can!")

      An old Ham called me up and wanted a way to run DOS on his W10 computer. He had programs he'd been using since the early 90's, his Windows 95 computer gave up the ghost, and he didn't want to change. I gave him some hints, but he didn't like it when I said the best idea was to start using software that wasn't written 30 years ago.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    5. Re:GPL DOS by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      You've never heard of DosBox? It works pretty good.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:GPL DOS by PRMan · · Score: 2

      A friend of mine does QA for machined parts for air manufacturers. When their old computer died, they started using DosBox instead. Works great.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    7. Re:GPL DOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XTG was boss... I later moved to ZTreeWin... I have more recently tried UnixTree but am not quite as impressed with it.

    8. Re:GPL DOS by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I was reading about FreeDOS recently and it got me thinking (again) about those wonderful applications we had back then.
      How is the copyright of those? I'm talking about things which were cool back in the 1980s -- not only games, but serious applications, too.

      Virtually all commercial software was closed source. Quite a bit of shareware was open source, though; I remember often being offered the source code in the documentation for DOS shareware.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:GPL DOS by Megol · · Score: 0

      For what? Last time I looked it could be used for games. Some games. Often the popular ones that somebody cared enough about to write workarounds for.
      It wasn't even good at emulating hardware used by games and creativity programs (music players, graphics stuff etc.).

      Of course that was my impression from some years ago, could be better now.

    10. Re:GPL DOS by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Or Xtree Gold, which was pure gold (duh!). I may revisit some alternative implementations for Linux soon, but XTG was beyond amazing.

      Xtree Gold was damn good. I also liked QDOS, another great DOS file manager (similar to XTree) that kicked ass. It was made by Gazelle. Am I the only one who remembers QDOS? All I can find for it is this old, old, old reference:

      http://www.verycomputer.com/12...

      Oh yeah, QDOS and my 14.4 Courier HST modem...good times.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    11. Re:GPL DOS by HornWumpus · · Score: 1, Informative

      In the time it took you write that post, you could have looked.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    12. Re:GPL DOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just for games and not a toy. I run a DSP Filter Design application on ubuntu using DOSBOX. It has a design technique not available on any of the current design applications. The application was written 1983-85 using compiled basic. Even the graphics works for displaying filter impulse and frequency responses. One day I may get round to writing a replacement in python/numpy/scipy/matplolib.

    13. Re:GPL DOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Am I the only one who remembers QDOS?

      Traces of shredded bits in my memory seem to indicate I tried and it failed to impress me (possibly because I was already fond of XTG. BTW, there are some pics online but they don't ring me a bell...

      The thing with XTG -- which probably few apps had -- is that you ended up getting a muscle memory of its commands. I remember it was insanely fast (probably due to keeping things in memory) and, more importantly, I was insanely fast using it, because I didn't have to decide what to do next. It was like Dr. Octopus' tentacles when I fired several commands in sequence. AFAIR, things combined in a logical way, for instance showing "global" files and showing only the txt ones. "Global" meant across all volumes in XTG parlance.

      NOTE: Any brand or character mentioned belongs to its legal owners, not me.

    14. Re:GPL DOS by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      You've never heard of DosBox? It works pretty good.

      I've heard of many things.I was relaying the story, not my suggestions. I did suggest DosBox. He didn't like it.

      And I still stand by my recommendation that he get a computer program that isn't worthless and will run on a modern computer. His output looked like something from 30 years ago. If you are doing design with a DOS program, you get documents that look like a step above a mechanical typwriter, and you glue the pictures to the output.

      In the end, I think what he was really looking for was an old 286 PC from a museum, so he didn't have to learn anything new.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    15. Re:GPL DOS by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      For what? Last time I looked it could be used for games. Some games. Often the popular ones that somebody cared enough about to write workarounds for. It wasn't even good at emulating hardware used by games and creativity programs (music players, graphics stuff etc.).

      Of course that was my impression from some years ago, could be better now.

      Keeping in mind that this guy was trying to keep using an ancient command line design program for graphic design, and use it in all of the ways needed, like printing - which I've not seen done on DosBox - does this DOS emulator have modern printer drivers? - to me, while yes I did tell him about DosBox, The smart money was on simply jumping ahead and using a program designed for modern computers.

      It wasn't even money - He had to buy a new computer when his old one crapped out, and the people he was doing this for would buy him the new layout software. He just didn't want to learn something new. Which meant he really didn't want to learn DosBox either. He must have a hella time with the kids on his lawn.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    16. Re:GPL DOS by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      Among other things, it can run Windows 3.1 (or 3.11, the workgroups forms, or whatever).. I'm sure that was fun to get working in the first place... but it appears to have been capable of this for ~10 years (Dosbox .70); also can run Windows 95 since version .74 (latest, 7 ya), and can at least run the Windows 98 setup program. I mention them as Windows tends to be broken in all sorts of weird and subtle ways, which is why i use them as something of a benchmark (not entirely unlike WINE being able to run Office). So if you haven't used it in the last 10 years, definitely give it another peek. 7 years, however, nothing much has changed aside from people's collective knowledge regarding working around issues.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    17. Re:GPL DOS by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      There are some DosBox forks/patches out there that enable things like parallel port passthrough... that'd be a nice one to have official support for. Seems they have a fair number of interesting builds at: http://www.dosbox.com/wiki/SVN...

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    18. Re:GPL DOS by Megol · · Score: 1

      Sure I could. If I'd be a very slow at typing - because (as for most projects) actually getting to know the problems takes some drilling down. Most people are enthusiastic when they get some thing working and those things are easily found while people that didn't get things working either: 1) just drop the program 2) tinker a bit and try to get it working (asking questions) 3) complain loudly acting as a little child 4) complain loudly because the problems are due to to the emulator design and nobody seem to care. It takes time to detect such tings and detect then someone is a no 3 or 4.

      Just trying a program for a limited time isn't enough. It can bug out after running X hours when events Y and Z happens simultaneously and the emulator doesn't handle that correctly for instance.

    19. Re:GPL DOS by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      There are quite a few operating systems and bolt-ons that do that already. It's probably the case that anything that doesn't work in DOSBox won't work in PC-MOS/386 either because it almost certainly requires direct access to hardware.

      Some background: in the mid-eighties Intel released the 80386, which was their first 32 bit CPU and probably the first general purpose 808x family CPU they had made since the 8080 that wasn't horribly hobbled by kludges (it had compatibility modes for prior CPUs, but the selling feature was the pure 32 bit mode.)

      The problem? There wasn't an operating system for it. Xenix was an obvious fit, but was too expensive. Microsoft and IBM were trying to figure out what to do with it and were avoiding using the pure 32 bit side. The other 32 bit operating systems were generally proprietary - you weren't going to get Commodore, Apple, or DEC to port AmigaOS, MacOS, or VMS to the PC, even assuming they could get the hardware working. (Well, actually MacOS was eventually ported to the PC, internally, though that was never released publicly. Look up Project Star Trek.)

      Into the void came companies like the makers of PC MOS who released operating systems loosely inspired by DOS. Which... didn't go anywhere. Partially because they just weren't compelling, and partially because they were nobodies. In the mean time Microsoft and Quarterdeck released bolt-ons to DOS and DOS/Windows that used some of the 386's enhancements to improve 16 bit applications. But nothing that encouraged anyone to write 32 bit applications.

      It wasn't until the early nineties that Microsoft and IBM released consumer level operating systems that made full use of the 386's 32 bit mode. Microsoft released the Win32 API, built in to NT, and released as a bolt-on to Windows 3.x, and IBM released OS/2 2.0 (yeah, OS/2 1.0 was 16 bit...) And it wasn't until 1995 that they started seriously pushing 32 bit operating systems (IBM's Warp, Windows 95, the latter winning.)

      So it took about 10 years for PC users to finally be given fully 32 bit computers - that is, hardware and software. Which is astonishing, given Apple, Commodore, Atari, and even f---ing Sinclair, were doing this for consumers in 1984.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    20. Re:GPL DOS by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      There are some DosBox forks/patches out there that enable things like parallel port passthrough... that'd be a nice one to have official support for. Seems they have a fair number of interesting builds at: http://www.dosbox.com/wiki/SVN...

      It's getting pretty complex for this guy though. This whole exercise would be learning how to use DosBox, whihc he doesn't want to do, or learning a modern graphic layout program, which he doesn't want to do. I see so many red flags that tell me I'd end up owning every problem on his computer.

      Maybe he could pick up an old 286 machine at a hamfest?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    21. Re:GPL DOS by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I was always a hardcore norton commander user. Light and fast even on the most primitive of PCs. But let's face it, nothing is as good as diropus on the Amiga :D

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    22. Re:GPL DOS by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      I was always a hardcore norton commander user. Light and fast even on the most primitive of PCs. But let's face it, nothing is as good as diropus on the Amiga :D

      Norton Commander was great, but they kept adding feature after feature after feature (most of them fairly useless) and it eventually got so bloated I just said "fuck it" and uninstalled it. Early on it was a great file manager, probably one of the best. But QDOS still owns mah heart, even after all this time.

      I never had an Amiga so I can't speak to diropus. I went from a Timex Sinclair to an Atari 800 to an PC-XT.....and then it was all downhill from there, lol.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  3. Comments? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's great and all, but is the source code commented? Or is there going to have to be a lot of additional effort expended on what will probably turn out to be a completely obsolete OS, just to figure out what it all did before anyone can do anything meaningful with it? I.e., check it over for security vulnerabilities, fatal code execution flaws, etc.?

    1. Re: Comments? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're nerds here. Uncommented, or poorly commented source code is interesting to dig around it. And it's open source and on git.

    2. Re:Comments? by thereitis · · Score: 1

      There's a link to the source code provided in the summary. In my very brief look at the code, what I saw was commented.

  4. it ran on a 80386 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, the summary reads:

    "saying it runs many MS-DOS titles (though it's optimized for the Intel 80386 processor). "

    why does it make it sound like dos and 386's were not a thing? I primarily ran MSDOS on my 386 and even my 486, but maybe I was late to the party?

    Help me understand

    1. Re:it ran on a 80386 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > why does it make it sound like dos and 386's were not a thing? I primarily ran MSDOS on my 386 and even my 486, but maybe I was late to the party?

      You're right, they weren't.

      Prior to them there was the classic IBM-PC (8088 processor, a trimmed 8086, which I understand as an 80186) and then, for a brief time, there was the 80286, very nice for that era.

      But the 386 sort of exploded because it made possible more serious OSes (like Linux).

      And even before the IBM-PC and DOS there was CP/M, which was the system on which DOS was "inspired" (in the sucking sense, I mean). It ran on the first microprocessors like the 8080, the 8085 and the best of all, the Z-80.

    2. Re:it ran on a 80386 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Score: -1 Down

    3. Re:it ran on a 80386 by scsirob · · Score: 1

      Most likely because many DOS programs back then were designed and written to run on even earlier CPU's like 8086 or 80286'es.. It will run those, but runs 80386 optimized programs best.

      --
      To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
    4. Re:it ran on a 80386 by Sique · · Score: 0
      No, the 80186 is something different than a 8086.

      If I remember correctly, the 80186 was the first attempt to bring the 8086 to full 16 bit, both registerwise and also in the pinout. Because you needed all new motherboards and chipsets to use the 80186, it was not a big success in the PC area. Thus Intel designed the 8088, which was an 80186, but with 8086-pinout, basicly an 80186SX.

      But while in the PC, the 80186 never caught on, it was the CPU for many embedded systems, running printers and dishwashers, and is still available today.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    5. Re: it ran on a 80386 by red_dragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      The first few x86 processor models came as follows: 8086: 16-bit registers, 16-bit data bus, 20-bit address bus 8088: cost-reduced version of the 8086 with 8-bit data bus 80186: new architecture, aimed at embedded applications, contains a lot of glue logic that required separate hardware on 8086 systems, same register/data/address sizes 80188: same as above but with 8-bit data bus 80286: new architecture, 24-bit address bus, protected mode

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
    6. Re:it ran on a 80386 by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      wrong again, the 186 was released in 82 based primarily for use in embedded systems as a micro-controller as most of its support hardware was on chip, similar to the 8085

    7. Re:it ran on a 80386 by Megol · · Score: 2

      The 80186 integrated some extra functionality, added some instructions and optimized timings compared to the 8086. It didn't change the basic ISA keeping the real mode unprotected segmentation with 1MiB address space and 16 bit registers.
      The 80286 was the one that changed anything significant by adding (in a very clumsy way) a protected mode with 16 bit segmentation and an expanded addressable space. This also indirectly meant that 80286+ systems suddenly could access 1MiB+64KiB-16B, the upper near-64KiB part was commonly called high memory.

      Timeline: 8086, 8088 (8 bit bus for cheaper systems), 80186.

    8. Re:it ran on a 80386 by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Maybe b'cos DOS was a 16-bit OS optimized for the 80286, which is why it had that 640k memory barrier in the first place. If PC-MOS/386 was optimized for a 386, chances are that it was a 32-bit OS, not 16.

    9. Re:it ran on a 80386 by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      Mission accomplished. Good work, team.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    10. Re:it ran on a 80386 by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      80186 was definitely well into microcontroller territory; haven't seen too many, but I do have an old security system control card, and previously had a hard drive duplicator/diagnostic station that ran on one. I *think* a storage oscilloscope I picked up ages ago might have had one as well, but I can't quite remember.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    11. Re:it ran on a 80386 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS-DOS is a 16 bit operating system designed for the original 16 bit 8088/86. The 386 was the first 32 bit processor to catch market share. Mostly because it could run all that 16 MS-DOS software as well.

      It was a good ten years between the arrival of 32 bit hardware, in the form of the the 386 the 486, and the arrival of a 32 bit operating system and software with Windows 95. Even that was just a 32 bit application layer sitting on to of MS-DOS. It was another 5 years before most people got a proper 32 bit OS in the form of Windows 2000.

      A decade and a half is a good long time for people to want to create a 32 bit OS that makes proper use of the commonly available 32 bit 386/486 machines.

      Hence PC-MOS and of course Linux.

    12. Re:it ran on a 80386 by Per+Wigren · · Score: 1

      It was used in the Compis computer that were common in Scandinavian schools throughout the 80s and early 90s. I learned touch typing on one of those.

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    13. Re:it ran on a 80386 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 80286 was the one that changed anything significant by adding (in a very clumsy way) a protected mode with 16 bit segmentation and an expanded addressable space.

      It also required a hard reset to switch back to real mode, leading Bill Gates to call it a "brain dead" chip.

    14. Re:it ran on a 80386 by pegr · · Score: 1

      PC-MOS used 32bit Enhanced Mode of the 386 to make a multiuser/multitasking DOS. Making sure you've correctly defined the unused address space between 640K and 1024K was absolutely required and was a bit of black magic.

      PC-MOS was good at a few apps, terrible on others. If it worked, it worked well. Most of the time it didn't work. :(

      (Trained and certified on PC-MOS back in the day.)

  5. WendesDOS by jlowery · · Score: 2

    I vaguely remember a similar operating system, written by brothers Wendes. As I recall, Microsoft quickly bought them out and employed them.

    --
    If you post it, they will read.
    1. Re:WendesDOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll just leave this here:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H27rfr59RiE

    2. Re:WendesDOS by tbuskey · · Score: 1

      WendinDos. I had a demo floppy for it. Multitasking DOS done well.

      When MS bought them, they buried it. :-(

  6. Worked great in an office setting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I loved PC-MOS/386 "back in the day" -- way back in the day. Even visited their headquarters at one point and attempted to get a dev job at one point.

    My employer who sold software for trucking companies used it as the cheapest alternative for small office settings where several dispatchers shared one beefy (for the time) computer with cheap terminals attached.

    It really was remarkable for the time how they made DOS multi-user.

    1. Re:Worked great in an office setting by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You were the ONE that got it to work? I wasted most of a month before returning it as useless, overpriced, broken, misdocumented junk.

      Also only made financial sense if you already owned the terminals. We were trying to use it as a dial-in host. Impossible to make it work with modems that generated more the 16 bytes of traffic per time slice, which wasn't documented. Just terrible.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Worked great in an office setting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I not only got it to work, but built interesting hybrid environments using the Novell Virtual Drivers to allow access to file servers/net printers. I had PC-MOS/386 running in 5 branch offices of a national grocery wholesaler, two of their subsidiaries, and a few of their customers.

      I liked PC-MOS, but hated their approach to compatibility, which was OS patches for specific applications! Talk about an interesting version of DLL hell; just imagine testing app patches to avoid conflicts.

      Still have a complete box set at home, including their companion peer-to-peer lan product, and sangoma's ckustercomm product which allowed a 386 running PC-MOS to emulate an IBM 327X controller supporting 256 Logical Units.

      I understand Bay Area Rapid Transit (California) used it in this manner for awhile. And the US Post Office was also supposed to have bought a few copies to run cheap multiuser at branches (not sure if it ever deployed).

  7. PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than Apple by jbn-o · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Many years ago Apple sold a device with a custom OS called the Newton. Apple sold Newtons for about 5 years (1993-1998) but never released the OS under a free software license. Today some users still own, repair, and use Newtons but they do so with no respect for their software freedom. Whatever problems Apple built into the Newton's software (whether on-purpose or accidentally) cannot be fixed by its users no matter how technically skilled or willing those users are.

    PC-MOS/386 currently requires a nonfree compiler (the Borland compiler) but now that PC-MOS/386 is free software it can be ported to systems so it will compile with free software compilers, thus avoiding the problem of free software with nonfree dependencies (what was originally known as "The Java Trap" named after free Java programs that depended on Sun's formerly nonfree Java software). We went from having no software freedom with PC-MOS/386 to being free to port and improve PC-MOS/386 as we wish! So PC-MOS/386 now that it has been released as free software treats you better than Apple treats Newton users. Thanks PC-MOS/386 developers for respecting our software freedom!

  8. FOSDEM 2018 Retrocomputing DevRoom by paugq · · Score: 1

    Sounds like a great candidate for a talk at FOSDEM 2018 Retrocomputing DevRoom. Call for Participation here:
    https://lists.fosdem.org/piper...

  9. Reboot by thereitis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "One does not simply reboot" - Boromir

    Sometimes I actually miss the complexity of assembler. Or maybe I just hate the 12 layers of abstraction that encompasses so many things these days. In a way it's not complexity of assembler I miss: it's the simplicity of knowing exactly what the computer is going to do.

    1. Re:Reboot by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2

      And now even assembler only vaguely resembles what the CPU is actually doing.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    2. Re:Reboot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but the equivalent model is rigorously defined, including all corner cases.
      This is not the case when you have 5+ nested level of library calls.
      Besides the fact that every level of abstraction by definition only offers a subset of the capabilities of the lower level, although I have to admit that it may make the common tasks a bit easier. The problem is that most libraries dislike (to put it mildly) being bypassed when you need to use the functionalities they don't wrap.

  10. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Whatever problems Apple built into the Newton's software (whether on-purpose or accidentally) cannot be fixed by its users no matter how technically skilled or willing those users are.

    You say that, but I don't know that it's true. It's not like they did anything to prevent you from replacing components, like signing code. Long before there was a source code leak, people were replacing portions of the AmigaOS with workalikes. Major portions of the OS, too, like the graphics library. There were also patches to system libraries to change their function. So no, I think if those users were more technically skilled, they could fix the problems with the Newton OS.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    What you described doesn't grant them complete source code access to the code they already have, nor does it grant them license to share, inspect, or modify said source code. So it's not the same as having software freedom which is what we see with PC-MOS/386. What you're describing is reverse engineering and replacing software components at best, a violation of the proprietary license at worst, and not respecting the user's software freedom either way.

  12. Assembler. by ledow · · Score: 0

    Like the "Prince of Persia" code release, I'm not at all sure of the point of a release of assembler-heavy code.

    Pretty much, you could get that from a disassembler just run on the same programs if you desperately needed to know what it did. Sure, legality and all, but is anyone really watching out for people reverse-engineering 20-year-old OS?

    As someone who was familiar with 8086 asm and things like Ralf Brown's Interrupt List, I have written any number of things using exactly this kind of code. And I couldn't even be bothered to pick through the logic of even a single file out of interest.

    Nice being GPL and all but are we going to see OpenMOS? I doubt it very much. It's like someone telling you a 100 year old recipe for bread. All very nice and all, but I bet it just tastes like shit and uses ingredients you can't get / don't want to use any more.

    1. Re:Assembler. by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      The recipe for 'Cicero Rye' died with the baker about 25 years ago.

      It was _great_ bread, there are websites dedicated to recreating/finding the recipe. The widow was offered five figures, but didn't know it.

      But PC-MOS is more like a recipe for wonder bread. (Astroglide is the secret ingredient, same as for McNuggets.)

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Assembler. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Besides learning about DOS stuff, many of these games use many tricks to optimize the games which not necessarily the code but the thinking processes could be useful even in modern languages.

      The other thing is legally, now it's open, if you happen to have used code that looks similar to the original, or some idiot actually plagiarized it, which wouldn't be necessarily unusual, there is no current or future rights holder (another SCO) that can claim ownership to the code.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    3. Re:Assembler. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Mod me funny?

      Learn and cry. Silicon oil (astroglide) IS the secret ingredient in almost all prepared frozen foods. Keeps them moist.

      I bet it's too expensive to put in wonder bread though.

      The correct moderation for this and parent post is 'offtopic'. Mods, please fix.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Assembler. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      OnTopic.

      Not sure how much astroglide in PC-MOS, more than zero. Could have used more. It WAS painful.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re:Assembler. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much, you could get that from a disassembler just run on the same programs if you desperately needed to know what it did.

      I completely disagree. There's a lot of information in comments, labels, etc. that you wouldn't get from a disassembly.

    6. Re:Assembler. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'm not at all sure of the point of a release of assembler-heavy code."

      Can't speak for this release as I haven't seen it... but associate documentation, comments, macros, and any other sorts of labels/symbols that might be of help to people reading it.

  13. 80286 Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Does anyone remember what the plugin card was that allowed you to run PC-MOS on a 286?

    I had it working many years ago with a multiport serial card on an IBM AT with as much RAM as it could hold and three Wyse terminals. There was a card that provided a MMU function and it was really neat seeing a single user machine support 4 people.

    1. Re:80286 Support by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I got to the point where I had wasted a month to learn I needed a special (expensive) four port serial card that they sold. I returned the whole mess instead.

      IIRC there was a 286 version of the software, but they dropped it pretty fast. I also recall 486 ISA cards, but they never made sense.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:80286 Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phew ...

      We had to develop a real-time server app that used 4 serial ports to connect to radio modems. Considered this product as well as a few alternatives. Finally went with SCO and never looked back. It was pricey, but it worked an was reliable.

    3. Re:80286 Support by bgmacaw · · Score: 0

      It was called the "AT Gizmo". The original design would only plug into a few other systems beyond the IBM AT. A newer design would fit about 80% of the 286 machines on the market at the time. It was mainly designed for PC-MOS's predecessor, Multilink, although it would work with PC-MOS, sometimes.

  14. Does it run Lotus 1-2-3 ? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    DOS is not done, till Lotus won't run, right?

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Does it run Lotus 1-2-3 ? by acvh · · Score: 1

      DOS is not done, till Lotus won't run, right?
      this brings back memories of working at The Computer Factory back in 1990. as I recall, we also had to replace (not flash, pull and insert) the BIOS on a bunch of NEC PCs because they wouldn't run 1-2-3.

      it was the era where Excel came with a runtime version of Windows because businesses didn't run Windows yet.

      now get off my lawn

    2. Re:Does it run Lotus 1-2-3 ? by bgmacaw · · Score: 0

      Yes. It did. Lotus 2.01 was one of our primary compatibility test programs. Word Perfect 4.2 was another one we tested a lot.

  15. Windows386? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    Didn't Windows386 run on top of this?

    For those unaware before NT hit Microsoft experimented with a non neutered version of Windows that didn't run on top of DOS. WIndows386 could run some legacy DOS apps and Win16 apps but required an expensive 386 with up to 2 whole megs of pricey ram.

    The idea and even some of the code made it to WindowsNT 3.1 and probably OS/2 as well.

    1. Re: Windows386? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dafuq? No. Where are you people coming up with this stuff? Please check the Wikipedia before puffing on the bong.

    2. Re:Windows386? by Lproven · · Score: 1

      No, not really.

      Windows/386 was a thing. It was the 386-specific version of Winows 2. It still ran on top of DOS, it just used the 386's Virtual8086 mode for better, hardware-assisted multitasking. It ran anything Windows 2 ran.

      Windows 3 merged the separate 8088/8086, 80286 & 80386 versions of Windows 2 into a single combined binary, with a clever mode-switcher to pick the appropriate one, slapped the GUI, fonts & 3D-shaded widgets from from OS/2 1.2 on it... and made MS wealthy.

      --
      Liam P. ~ "Intelligence is a lethal mutation." (me)
    3. Re:Windows386? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, most everything you wrote is incorrect. Windows/386 still ran atop DOS, was mainly about memory management and supported limited multitasking of some DOS apps. Ironic, given your username...

      Side-note: I had 4MB RAM in a 286.

    4. Re:Windows386? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Anybody who didn't have 4MB of RAM in their '286 motherboard was doing it wrong.

    5. Re:Windows386? by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      I'm curious to know where this (mis)information originates.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    6. Re:Windows386? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Anybody who didn't have 4MB of RAM in their '286 motherboard was doing it wrong.

      My 286 motherboard maxed out at 1MB, you insensitive clod! That was enough to run Xenix, though.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  16. back in the day by spaceman375 · · Score: 5, Informative

    As long as we are indulging in retro-praise...

    I was really impressed with an OS named Pick. It was essentially a database, but a plain 286 with 2 megs of RAM could run 10 terminals and four printers while doing a tape backup with no lag. Mind you, all it did was ascii; no graphics or sound. But the concept was impressive: Since nobody could make a CPU as complex as they needed, under the OS was less than 100k that emulated a more complex CPU, and the OS itself was written in assembler for that virtual CPU. Pick was actually the first OS to run on the original RISC processor from IBM because that virtual CPU was so close to the real hardware 20 years later. When IBM wanted an OS for the first PC they tried to get Pick before DOS. The owner was hanging upside down in gravity boots when he laughed at them because he said it was too complex to run on their weak hardware. What can you expect from a guy named Dick Pick? True story, but I loved that stupid OS.

    --
    On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
    1. Re:back in the day by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      You could do some impressive stuff with PICK, with just a knowledge of BASIC.

    2. Re:back in the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You talk about Pick as if it were dead. There are still tens of thousands of computers running Pick and Pick derived OSes and many millions running the similar MUMPS system in the medical industry.

    3. Re:back in the day by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I still have an Altos 586. It's an 8086 box that runs Microsoft Xenix (from before they sold it off to create SCO). It's an 8086-based machine with 512k of RAM, a 10MB hard drive, and it has 5 RS-232 ports so five users can be logged in simultaneous on the Xenix system, which is a port of Series 3 UNIX that Microsoft produced. Yes, Microsoft was a UNIX software vendor back in the day.

      Five concurrent users on an 8086 processor with 512K of RAM. From Microsoft. With dazzling hardware designed by Altos, of course.

    4. Re:back in the day by Christian+Smith · · Score: 1

      ... so five users can be logged in simultaneous on the Xenix system, which is a port of Series 3 UNIX that Microsoft produced. Yes, Microsoft was a UNIX software vendor back in the day.

      Five concurrent users on an 8086 processor with 512K of RAM. From Microsoft. With dazzling hardware designed by Altos, of course.

      IIRC, MicroSoft was in fact the largest UNIX vendor of the day. This was a time when AT&T had only just come out of their consent decree preventing them selling UNIX, the likes of SUN and SGI were minnow start ups, and HP/IBM had a myriad of other proprietary cash-cow OSes already.

      I remember being pretty impressed on a university open day at one of the labs being run on a single Xenix PC, with maybe 20 terminals attached. Probably not a 8086 PC, mind, this was 1993, but probably nothing more powerful than a i386. (that said, the adjacent lab of brand new SUNstation IPXs was more impressive :)

    5. Re:back in the day by GerryGilmore · · Score: 2

      Rather than burn a mod point, let me just add a kudo to your comment. Pick was probably the finest OS ever created: intimately tied with a real database; amazingly efficient and effective; totally dedicated to things just working solidly... Having gone through everything from DG's RDOS and AOS through TI's DX-10 and DNOS, then various UNIX flavors and Linux (what I'm currently running), it was the BEST! Damn - if only we could open-source Pick....

    6. Re: back in the day by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      In the future, you should mention Dick Pick much sooner in the story.

    7. Re:back in the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My last name is Pick, and to this day, I have still not tried PickOS.. I guess I need to figure it out..

    8. Re:back in the day by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I still have an Altos 586. It's an 8086 box that runs Microsoft Xenix (from before they sold it off to create SCO). It's an 8086-based machine with 512k of RAM, a 10MB hard drive, and it has 5 RS-232 ports so five users can be logged in simultaneous on the Xenix system, which is a port of Series 3 UNIX that Microsoft produced. Yes, Microsoft was a UNIX software vendor back in the day.

      Five concurrent users on an 8086 processor with 512K of RAM. From Microsoft. With dazzling hardware designed by Altos, of course.

      Interestingly, MS-DOS installable device drivers were actually modeled after Xenix's device drivers - using a "strategy" and then an "interrupt" routine. Additional MS-DOS niceties (including use of file handles) were again inspired by Xenix.

      MS-DOS 1.0 was an interesting beast - it was designed basically to handle CP/M programs, even though CP/M only existed on 8-bit machines at the time. There was at best an unreleased version of CP/M for 16-bit machines but nothing for the 8088.

      So Microsoft made QDOS with CP/M interfaces because Microsoft saw that since you were going to port code anyways, Microsoft wrote a source code translator - you gave it your CP/M source code, and it spat out something that would run on the IBM PC PC-DOS/MS-DOS 1.0 because it emulated all the CP/M interfaces.

      This was done as the anticipation was CP/M would remain the OS into the future - after all, CP/M for 16-bit was announced.

      Of course, when that didn't happen, Microsoft created MS-DOS 2.0 with much better and more modern interfaces, including filehandles (instead of file control blocks) which allowed for hierarchical directories. CP/M basically died after people migrated from 8-bit machines.

    9. Re:back in the day by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      You do know it's still very popular, right? If you want to work with it a lot of vertical market software companies are desperately trying to get away from it.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Look for products based on "universe" or "unidata" or "unibase".

    10. Re:back in the day by TSpec · · Score: 1

      How about a GPL2 version of it? http://scarlet.deltasoft.com/index.php/Main_Page/ - this is a fork of OpenQM, which is a feature-complete multi-value database system. It's compatible with a number of "flavors" of Pick, including D3, Universe, Reality, PI, etc.

    11. Re:back in the day by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      CP/M for 16 bit machines wasn't just announced. CP/M-86 was one of the operating systems that was complete and available to purchase from IBM to run on the original IBM PC. It continued to exist for awhile after release, in fact. There were mutliple OSes available to run on the IBM PC.

      The IBM PC could even be used without any OS at all. It had a Microsoft-produced BASIC interpreter in ROM. Any 8088-generation IBM-PC will boot into the BASIC interpreter prompt after a delay, if it finds no bootable OS, just like an Apple, Commodore or TRS-80 computer of the era would.

      Until the PC/XT the IBM machines had a second DIN socket next to the keyboard interface to plug an audio cassette player into to save BASIC programs, and also DATA to/from BASIC programs if you wished.

      Most PC-clones still had the sockets on the motherboard for ROM chips similar to the BASIC interpreter ROMs from IBM, but they were unpopulated, because the BASIC roms were copyrighted. Microsoft had to produce a disk-based version of BASIC (GW-Basic) for MS-DOS (the proper DOS to use on PC-clones, though IBM's PC-DOS mostly works) to replace the BASIC and BASICA interpreters in IBM's PC-DOS, because BASIC/BASICA made use of direct calls to the routines in the IBM ROM chips.

    12. Re:back in the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pick would support 80 simultaneous users on an IBM PS/2 model 80, all running green-screen terminals (VT100s and Wyse 50s & 80s in VT emulation mode were favorites). That was unheard of price/performance ratio at the time. Unfortunately, printers counted as users because they each claimed a serial port.

      An IBM 360 or 370 would only support about 3/4 of that number before bogging down. A Honeywell DPS 15 or DEC LSI would support a 100 or more, but add another zero to the left of the decimal in the purchase price to get there. Pick would run on even larger IBM systems (4381, 3070) and large systems from Buroughs, Fujitsu, Unysis and other companies now gone by the way-side. It was easy to use, fun to program in (extended Dartmouth-BASIC, anyone?) and the reporting tool was intuitive (select from customers by name where last_order_date GE "01-01-1980" and last_ order_date LE "01-01-1985" group by quarter total order_count total order_count grand total _total_order_count)
      and if you wanted to really have fun to you could load the assembly debugger and watch it all happen in memory in real time.

  17. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right, no "software freedom," but the ability certainly existed, with enough effort (think disassembly).

  18. DR FlexOS 386 was similar by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    It was decent.

  19. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    What you're describing is reverse engineering and replacing software components at best, a violation of the proprietary license at worst,

    Reverse engineering, at least in the USA, is explicitly protected when carried out for the purpose of interoperability.

    and not respecting the user's software freedom either way.

    Users that care about software freedom don't give money to Apple in the first place.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  20. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

    PC-MOS/386 currently requires a nonfree compiler (the Borland compiler) but now that PC-MOS/386 is free software it can be ported to systems so it will compile with free software compilers [...]

    Good luck with that. I tried working my way through an older how to write a compiler book that was written in Borland C. Transliterating Borland C into ANSI C to compile with gcc was a bit hairy.

    Really? What problems did you run into that weren't assembly related? I recently compiled some 16bit OS code (I originally wrote it for Watcom C/C++ Compiler, with wasm assembler - I still have the CD) on gcc and the only major problems I had was getting a linker to produce flat binaries. Sure, there were other problems but they were small and easily worked-around/fixed.

    If you're producing a compiler (which is just another program) there really isn't any code that compiles on Borland turbo C that would present much of a problem to gcc, unless you're attempting to produce 16-bit binaries, which you wouldn't be doing when writing a compiler anyway.

    The reason I had problems was because of the need of a flat 16bit linker. What problems did you have?

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  21. Again with the Multitasking by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

    The x86 task shared, the Amiga Multitask'd.

    1. Re:Again with the Multitasking by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      I first encountered PC-MOS in 1991 or so. I was repairing a computer for a customer and it was installed on his machine. I asked him what it was, and he said "it's a multi-user Disk Operating system."

      "How would that work?" I wondered. There is only one keyboard and one monitor.

    2. Re:Again with the Multitasking by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      I first encountered PC-MOS in 1991 or so. I was repairing a computer for a customer and it was installed on his machine. I asked him what it was, and he said "it's a multi-user Disk Operating system."

      "How would that work?" I wondered. There is only one keyboard and one monitor.

      Ah darn, I read Multitasking, it would only be normal.

      I had a friend who was all about Sparc stations they were a multi-user system. It wasn't working right if it didn't have network access, this well before WWW.

    3. Re:Again with the Multitasking by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I had a friend who was all about Sparc stations they were a multi-user system. It wasn't working right if it didn't have network access, this well before WWW.

      Sun networks of yesteryear overwhelmingly used yp ("yellow pages"), a system for distributed flat database files. Instead of just having a local passwd file, you'd have a networked one. Same for the hosts file, and some others. Even relatively late versions of SunOS for the x86 didn't even come with DNS resolution enabled; you had to actually re-link a system library (libc? I forget) to do DNS resolution, because internet access was less common than an internal network based on yp.) I had to do this on my 3/260, before I turned it into a 4/260.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Again with the Multitasking by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      I assume you mean pre-emptive multitasking, as opposed to, say, Windows 3.1 or MacOS's cooperative multitasking. Let's ignore the fact this is for the 80386 which, you know, was the predominant architecture until amd64 came along, and what operating systems like GNU/Linux, Windows NT (2000/XP/Vista/7/8/10), Windows 95/98/Me, etc runs on:

      ALL x86s are perfectly capable of proper, AmigaOS/QDOS/etc style multitasking. Some examples (all available for the 8088 unless marked):

      - Xenix
      - MINIX
      - Coherent
      - DOS Plus (and Concurrent DOS IIRC)
      - OS/2 (OS/2 was available for the 80286)

      (Examples of cooperative multitasking for machines "more like" the Amiga: MacOS, MultiTOS)

      I believe the operating system under discussion also supported pre-emptive multitasking, at least, that's what I read about it at the time. Hard for it not to. The only reason Windows didn't was because early versions of Windows set up a cooperative architecture, not because it was hard.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:Again with the Multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, for some reason Amiganauts believe the Amiga had some sort of magic multitasking secret sauce, and not just a stock 68000.

      Macs offered pre-emptive multitasking in the '80s too, but you had to shell out for A/UX to get it.

    6. Re:Again with the Multitasking by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      Yeah, for some reason Amiganauts believe the Amiga had some sort of magic multitasking secret sauce, and not just a stock 68000.

      Macs offered pre-emptive multitasking in the '80s too, but you had to shell out for A/UX to get it.

      Not magic as chips the 68000 could farm out to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      I did in the late 80's what I'm doing now with windows, yet with a 50 meg hard dive and 10 megs of Sram memory.

  22. Added bonus: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has virtual modem support for incoming/outgoig telnet streams.

    So if you have a need to keep old dialup applications running, whether for retrobbsing, or some actual dialup business app, you can, just by setting up a couple stunnels or similiar and dialing in/out through them.

    Would be nice if they eventually got some sort of TLS support built in the dosbox modem module, and a similiar virtual model serial module for qemu.

    At that point we could all party like it's the 1970s to mid 90s :)

  23. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cousin! Give up your life of obesity and creamed corn!

    I laughed so much reading your latest drivel on your site.

    As a writer [...] The week itself became a trial from jury duty, fire smoke and a bomb threat.

    As a writer, you should know the expression is trial by. Just thought you might want to learn something today.

  24. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a writer, you should know the expression is trial by.

    Trial by [fire|combat|stupidity] is the idiom.

    Just thought you might want to learn something today.

    I suggest you get a dictionary for the definition of trial and stop trying to be a failed literary critic.

    a test of faith, patience, or stamina through subjection to suffering or temptation; broadly :a source of vexation or annoyance

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trial

  25. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the idiomatic preposition, obviously. He didn't change "trial," he changed the associated preposition. You have a "trial by" not a "trial from." It's just how the English language works, although non-native speakers and the poorly educated often have a hard time with it.

  26. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Creimer troll. Mod this shit down.

  27. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Trial by [fire|combat|stupidity] is the idiom."

    Correct! So why did our lumbering cetacean fool write "trial FROM ????

    " stop trying to be a failed literary critic."

    I'm not criticizing your "literary" content, since there isn't any. I'm trying to get you to write at the high school level, Chris. For your own good.

    "I suggest you get a dictionary for the definition of trial and stop trying to be a failed literary critic.

    a test of faith, patience, or stamina through subjection to suffering or temptation; broadly :a source of vexation or annoyance"

    They gave you jury duty for a test of faith? Although reading your stuff leads to a lot of suffering, this is true. I think I know what you were trying to convey, but there are better ways of saying it without tripping up the reader with your odd structure.

    Chris, you've got goats on the brain. Time to grab Uncle Chuck's bucket and head to the neighbor's again.

  28. Whew by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Whew, just in time....a useless 30-year old OS that likely won't run on anything.

    Now what?

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  29. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Correct! So why did our lumbering cetacean fool write "trial FROM ????

    Your usage of "lumbering cetacean" indicates that you're more interested in attacking the person rather than caring about the language.

    I'm trying to get you to write at the high school level, Chris.

    The reading level for the average American is 7th to 8th grade, which happens to be the writing level of creimer's blog posts. If he wrote at the high school level, his reading audience would be significantly smaller. Just because someone graduated from high school and/or college, it doesn't mean that they have the ability to read or write at that level. Communication should be written for the broadest possible audience.

  30. Re:On the behalf of Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who appointed you to talk on behalf of Slashdot? If anything, recent events have shown that Slashdot wants you to shut the hell up!

  31. Re:On the behalf of Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering that every AC is supposed to be Chris (creimer), it makes sense for creimer to represent all of Slashdot.

  32. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chris' case is getting worse, he spends all day replying to himself as AC on /.

    The tests we ran on Chris have shown that Chris has the intelligence of an ameba:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    So, technically, he is able to conceive some kind of agenda but it will be silly or impossible to follow on a human scale.

    For example, Chris had an agenda to post anything he felt like on Slashdot which did not work well because it was based on his false beliefs that he had an infinite number of karma points as he wrote here several times.

    Several people here explained to Chris that karma maxed out at some level like 50 or so but Chris kept on insisting that his python script had confirmed that he had millions of karma points!

    Oh well, as I wrote before: "It isn't Chris' fault if he is the way he is. We do the best we can do with him and he is partially integrated into society. We try to cure his abnormal need for attention but he is kind of stubborn and won't listen to anybody."

    For the valuable /. users that might already have read the following, please note that there is an important update.

    IMPORTANT UPDATE:
    Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education has invested money to buy Chris a new chair:
    http://www.keynamics.com/image...

    Information about Christopher Dale Reimer and autistic people:

    Autistic people have obsessions about things normal people don't care. For example, one of our autistic patient went haywire when he realized that there was a penny missing in his pocket change.

    To calm him down, one of our educator pretended to have found it on the floor and gave a penny to him.

    The autistic patient condition went even worse because he realized it wasn't the same penny!

    Chris has an obsession with budgeting every penny. He doesn't understand that most people do not budget to the penny and have a flexible amount they allow for miscellaneous items.

    I am Nancy Guerrero and I am Director of Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education. We use Chris' (a.k.a. creimer,cdreimer) picture in our document because he is the hardest case we have ever had to handle:
    http://www.sccoe.org/depts/stu...

    Our artists were inspired by the low carb diet that Christopher follows scrupulously for the small lunch box and by the picture linked below for the rest. I am sure that you will notice the similarities such as the bump on the side of his chest and more:
    https://ibb.co/gVad65

    Please be easy on Christopher although, I am aware that some of our staff handling Chris post joke comments here and obvoiusly, the Santa Clara County Office of Education disapprove that behavior vehemently:
    https://school.discoveryeducat...

    But it isn't Chris' fault if he is the way he is. We do the best we can do with him and he is partially integrated into society. We try to cure his abnormal need for attention but he is kind of stubborn and won't listen to anybody.

    Thank You dear users,
    ---
    Nancy Guerrero
    Dircetor
    Special Education
    Santa Clara County Office of Education

  33. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Your usage of "lumbering cetacean" indicates that you're more interested in attacking the person rather than caring about the language."

    Cetaceans are very intelligent sea-going mammals. Lumbering indicates a creature of immense strength (think football player). And you don't think calling him a "fool" was an attack?

  34. Re:On the behalf of Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks Nancy,

    Your posts are always enlightening and right on topic! Keep up the good work over there at Special Education!

    Also, I have noted that Chris uses child psychology to convince his so called trolls to give up by pretending they just give him free publicity. That's adoring.

    Silvia Bunge
    Psychology Department
    Berkeley University

  35. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ***please pay attention to the Moon update***

    C.D. Reimer is a renowned Slashdot collaborator, as he puts it himself; "Because of the quality of my posts and my article submissions, I'm a highly rated commentator and moderator."

    But does anybody ever wondered what "C.D." stands for? Well, it stands for Creimy Dumpty of course!

    Creimy Dumpty sat on the wall,
    Creimy Dumpty had a great fall.
    All the king's horses
    And all the king's men
    Couldn't put Creimy Dumpty
    Together again.

    Creimy's siblings video and theme song, very realistic, especially the pants, just like Creimy's:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    With "Vice President Pence Vowing US Astronauts Will Return To the Moon", we are sure they will need miracle workers up there, here is what it would look like. Note that Creimy takes care of bringing a lot of food to the moon as depicted below:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Creimy's real pictures:
    Before the sex change:
    https://ibb.co/cc7Ddw
    After the sex change:
    https://ibb.co/gVad65

    Creimy's "enterprise-level" chair, he talks about it all the time on slashdot:
    http://www.keynamics.com/image...

    Creimy's head, while his supervisor was talking to him, not with him, since it is impossible to do with Creimy:
    https://school.discoveryeducat...

    Creimy acting in educational resource document, he actually confirmed himself on Slashdot that he was handled by Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education! He is really a king Dumpty!:
    http://www.sccoe.org/depts/stu...

  36. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey Creimy-Dumpty, while at it, you forgot to put the word "Sex" in your new blog shit post title.

    Your score as the greatest marketeer just fell down, in my book!

  37. Re:On the behalf of Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Lillyayayko55@yahoo.jp
    103.208.220.144

    Lilly, please stop posting these comments. The Slashdot community is monitoring you now.

  38. OS/2 !!!! by martiniturbide · · Score: 1

    Can someone track OS/2's source code? It seems that IBM misplaced it ;)

  39. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems like you are not aware of who you replied to. It's Creimy-Dumpty! That explains everything!

    ***please pay attention to the Moon update***

    C.D. Reimer is a renowned Slashdot collaborator, as he puts it himself; "Because of the quality of my posts and my article submissions, I'm a highly rated commentator and moderator."

    But does anybody ever wondered what "C.D." stands for? Well, it stands for Creimy Dumpty of course!

    Creimy Dumpty sat on the wall,
    Creimy Dumpty had a great fall.
    All the king's horses
    And all the king's men
    Couldn't put Creimy Dumpty
    Together again.

    Creimy's siblings video and theme song, very realistic, especially the pants, just like Creimy's:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    With "Vice President Pence Vowing US Astronauts Will Return To the Moon", we are sure they will need miracle workers up there, here is what it would look like. Note that Creimy takes care of bringing a lot of food to the moon as depicted below:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Creimy's real pictures:
    Before the sex change:
    https://ibb.co/cc7Ddw
    After the sex change:
    https://ibb.co/gVad65

    Creimy's "enterprise-level" chair, he talks about it all the time on slashdot:
    http://www.keynamics.com/image...

    Creimy's head, while his supervisor was talking to him, not with him, since it is impossible to do with Creimy:
    https://school.discoveryeducat...

    Creimy acting in educational resource document, he actually confirmed himself on Slashdot that he was handled by Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education! He is really a king Dumpty!:
    http://www.sccoe.org/depts/stu...

  40. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chris living in his imaginary world again which most people find weird, twisted and absurd and which Chris accepts as being perfectly normal.
    ---
    Nancy Guerrero
    Dircetor
    Special Education
    Santa Clara County Office of Education

  41. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When creimer whistles, his trolls start humping legs. Just like Pavlov's dogs. Isn't that right, Lilly?

  42. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who the fuck is Lilly?

  43. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear users,

    I already posted this in the following thread but I think it is relevant here:
    https://slashdot.org/comments....

    Thanks Nancy,

    Your posts are always enlightening and right on topic! Keep up the good work over there at Sp

    Also, I have noted that Chris uses child psychology to convince his so called trolls to give

    ---
    Silvia Bunge
    Psychology Department
    Berkeley University

  44. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Creimer, you illiterate ameba,

    My first name is: Lill
    My last name is: Yayako

    You definitely have to get your meds input regulated. You are furtherly loosing it as we speak, just as Silvia Bunge and Nancy Guerrero have mentioned here.

  45. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Creimer lives in the imaginary world of mangas. That's why he thought that Ayako was more common than Yayako.

    Chris, my daughter is studying in marketing at Berkeley. If you ever feel like listening to anybody, she is willing to show you a few basics, I already asked her while we were studying your case together.

    That should make you feel happy since you were then getting the attention of both of us.

    We love you Chris,
    ---
    Silvia Bunge
    Psychology Department
    Berkeley University

  46. Re:On the behalf of Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chris living in his imaginary world again which most people find weird, twisted and absurd and which Chris accepts as being perfectly normal.

    We love you Chris,
    ---
    Nancy Guerrero
    Dircetor
    Special Education
    Santa Clara County Office of Education

  47. Copyright: ask before selling, if not licensed by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > How is the copyright of those? I'm talking about things which were cool back in the 1980s -- not only games, but serious applications, too.

    Unfortunately the bills to address this in US law haven't passed. It doesn't seem like there is a ton of opposition, there just isn't enough interest to push a bill all the way through both houses of Congress. (Bills have passed one house or the other at different times.)

    Some of them are open source or public domain. If you to to distribute any proprietary ones, try to contact the author before SELLING them. If it was made by a company that has since gone out of business, you're probably safe giving copies away. It's technically not legal to give them away, but a law suit from an author who appears wouldn't be able to claim much in the way of damages.

    Copyright infringement and fair use gets a little complicated, but it's all centered around the idea that you can't sell someone else's work IN COMPETITION with their own authorized sales. If you're a) not selling and b) not giving copies to people who might have otherwise bought a copy from the author, you probably won't get in much trouble zero even though it's not actually legal.

    1. Re:Copyright: ask before selling, if not licensed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the well-worded reply.

      Within the limits of my scarce knowledge I'm under the impression that it is sound advice.

  48. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was eagerly waiting finally all along.

    I finally think all Slashdot headlines should be phrased this way. Finally:

    "2 Million IoT Devices Enslaved By Finally Fast-Growing BotNet"
    "A 14 year old asks: When should I finally get a VPN?"
    "Canadian Government Teams Finally with Facebook"
    "YouTube Suspends Account of Finally Popular Chinese Dissident"
    "See Giant Finally Robots Fight."
    "Tesla Plans Finally Factory in China."
    "Security Upgraded for finally NetBSD-64"
    "With Rising Database Finally Breaches, Two-factor Authentication at Risk."
    "Microsoft Chastises Google Finally Over Chrome Security"
    "NYT Op-Ed Argues Amazon 'Finally Took Seattle's Soul'"
    "Amazon Patents Drones That Recharge Electric Vehicles Finally"


    I like mine better

  49. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by The123king · · Score: 1
    --
    If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
  50. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Here we are talking about how you can't get OS source code, and you post a link which still doesn't contain the OS source code. It's almost like you aren't actually reading what's being written, but your knee jerked when you heard something bad about Apple and you just had to shit out a meaningless pro-Apple comment.

    Sure, Apple has opened some stuff. Stuff that they didn't have the skills to maintain on their own, like llvm. Get back to me when they release complete OS sources. Until then, they're no different from Microsoft.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  51. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by The123king · · Score: 1

    They still release a hell of a lot more code than Microsoft does. The whole kernel is open source, unlike Microsoft. In fact, that page from Apple is much more descriptive than the same one from M$... https://open.microsoft.com/

    --
    If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
  52. love those comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nca segment at 386h ; we lie, so what?

    jne i01escok ; no, skip this garbage

  53. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by null+etc. · · Score: 1

    Oh my gosh... I had lived most of my life without any regrets whatsoever. Now that I know about the tragedy of Apple Newton not having free software, it will haunt me to my dying day, being the biggest regret I will lament upon my death bed.

  54. Re:On the behalf of Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Berkeley University

    The music school? You mean UC Berkeley.

  55. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Reziac · · Score: 1

    The old Borland compilers may not be libre, but they were made freely available over a decade ago.

    http://edn.embarcadero.com/art...

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  56. Hardware by DrYak · · Score: 1

    It wasn't even good at emulating hardware used by games and creativity programs (music players, graphics stuff etc.)

    Depends on the hardware.

    If it's some rare custom ISA card hardware : yes it's going to be problematic. (e.g.: some custom ISA controller used by the photo scanner of some graphics creativity program, or a custom ISA multi-channel DAC used by scientific equipment).

    If it talks to the computer using a standard way (e.g.: talks over a standard COM port, a MIDI port or - rarely back then - talks over the network using some packet driver) or if the ISA card is a common one (nearly any sound card, including Garvis Ultrasound) : it works pretty well.

    That even include emulating some quirks and hacks (TweakMode/ModeX type of graphical modes, abusing the NTSC composite color clash to generate more than the 4 CGA colors, etc.) or even emulating devices connected to the virtual PC (there are software to emulate a full blown MT32 synth connected to the dosbox' MIDI bus).

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  57. Open source Windows 10. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahaha Bill would be attacked immediately by the whole world.

    Can not trust Billy.

  58. Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's up to us as a community to keep the spam quality as high as possible as we troll creimer.

  59. Re:On the behalf of Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is lilly? Somehow I doubt creimer is being trolled by a japanese woman.

  60. Re: PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than Ap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the fuck is a Lilly?

  61. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reason I had problems was because of the need of a flat 16bit linker. What problems did you have?

    It doesn't make any sense because it probably never actually happened and he doesn't have enough karma to reply anyhow. Once he even made up a story about ruining his roommates work laptop by deleting COMMAND.COM. It's anybody's guess why creimer would make these things up when from time to time he seems to have some legitimately interesting projects under his belt.

    Creimer: Do you know that if you do this in real life people won't trust you and you'll never advance in your career and friendships?

  62. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you Silvia!
    I'd like to welcome you to our creimer support community we hope you have a great time.

  63. Did they delete one of creimer's posts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did they delete that post with that girl's e-mail and IP address?

  64. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're producing a compiler (which is just another program) there really isn't any code that compiles on Borland turbo C that would present much of a problem to gcc, unless you're attempting to produce 16-bit binaries, which you wouldn't be doing when writing a compiler anyway.

    The book I was working from had pre-ANSI C code. Gcc wouldn't compile the source files without major changes. Some of the references to header files were obsolete, updating the header files meant that corresponding code had to change, and I rewrote entire blocks of code that I couldn't get to work otherwise. The compiler target language was Pascal. So I had to brush up on C and learn Pascal at the same time.

  65. (Not)Creimer pretending to be retarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh I'm sorry you're some other guy who only pretending to be retarded.
    I was totally confused because creimer thoroughly pwned my anus when he lost his 10 year old account and made 3 blog posts about not being mad.

    Creimey-Dumpty Creimey-Dumpty Hoy! Hoy! Hoy!
    Creimey-Dumpty Creimey-Dumpty Hoy! Hoy! Hoy!
    Creimey-Dumpty Creimey-Dumpty Hoy! Hoy! Hoy!

  66. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "he seems to have some legitimately interesting projects under his belt."

    That's not a belt; Chris insists that's a pair of gym shorts.

  67. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It might help if you stopped posting under all those Cashews accounts, Chris. Except FatCashewsLoveMe. That one's mine.

  68. Socrates to the rescue! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahhh the good ole it's ad hominem to make fun of me defense.
    Easily the most effective way to win an argument and make people stop picking on you. Works every time.

  69. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except FatCashewsLoveMe. That one's mine.

    Yes, Chris. We know. :P

  70. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by FatCashewsSlapMe · · Score: 0

    Cousin, leave the poor creimer and stop hanging out with all these bananas!

  71. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot to go AC. Still fucking the neighbors' goats?

  72. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, Chris, I took your uncle "Bugfucker" Chuck's advice, I went to the imam and bought your own goats!

    So you don't need to wait or ask your neighbor's permission anymore, Chris! I talked to them and told them if they see a large, shambling slow-witted Bigfoot-looking motherfucker sneaking into the barn, it's just you.

    They shook their head in resignation, but they accept your predilections. They lived next to Mormons so they know all about inbreeding and its ... unfortunate side-effects.

  73. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

    If you're producing a compiler (which is just another program) there really isn't any code that compiles on Borland turbo C that would present much of a problem to gcc, unless you're attempting to produce 16-bit binaries, which you wouldn't be doing when writing a compiler anyway.

    The book I was working from had pre-ANSI C code. Gcc wouldn't compile the source files without major changes. Some of the references to header files were obsolete, updating the header files meant that corresponding code had to change, and I rewrote entire blocks of code that I couldn't get to work otherwise.

    Are you perhaps referring to the conio.h and dos.h headers? When writing a compiler you can simply rip them out and replace or wrap the functions they prototype very easily with standard library functions.

    Post the code snippet that fails on gcc into a pastebin; I'm now very curious to see why it doesn't compile.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  74. Re:PC-MOS/386 developers treat you better than App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Creimer loves to play with his trolls. Every morning he leaps out of bed - well, groans and trundles out of bed, accompanied by the popping and snapping of his joints, his bedspring, and his floor; when he's laying down, the excess load is distributed across more floor space - once he's on two feet, the area supporting him upright has to bear significantly more stress - and says, "I can't wait to extend a well-muscled leg on Slashdot for my trolls to hump!"

    He then proceeds to enjoy his leg-humping, while raking in fat stacks of money from his Amazon link spam. They don't even realize that they're playing right into his cunningly-devised scheme!

    Creimer, you've said repeatedly you enjoy interacting with the trolls, and they're helping you achieve your goals of financial independence and worldwide fame. Why would anybody involved in this delightful win-win want Creimer's trolls to leave Creimer alone, whether he's here in the guise of creimer, cdreimer, __aaclcg7560, or any of the Cashews accounts, except for FatCashewsLoveMe - ciao, balena! - or his karma-depleted AC posts?