Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

FreeDOS' contributor (Miscellaneous)

posted by Rugxulo(R) Homepage, Usono, 07.04.2009, 13:24

> I know that you love to supply huge lists, but you probably should be
> aware that some people - including me - won't get intimidated by such
> "information", because they prefer quality over quantity.

Like making sure HIMEMX runs on 386s? (Still waiting on that patch.) :-P

> > IIRC, the only other people I've e-mailed nearly 1/10th as much are
> > Octavio Vega Fernandez (back before work overtook him) and David
> Lindauer
> > (back when CC386 was on fire with updates). All equally nice and
> brilliant
> > people.
> I know that you love to talk, so it's not very surprising for me that you
> like people who are "slightly" talkative.

For all the whining I always hear from various people "Report a bug, write a patch, roll your own, port it yourself, test it yourself, contact the author", guess how all of that is accomplished? Talk.

> > And FYI, that's not to discount anybody on this forum either. I'd every
> > bit as much praise you guys for your efforts too! (Remember, Japheth,
> > you're FreeDOS Man of the Year 2008 ... of course, that's just my
> humble
> > opinion!) :-D
> This isn't appreciated, because I use FreeDOS for testing purposes only. I
> still prefer MS-DOS, simply because it is better IMO.
> Additionally, I'm not a victim of the "Freedom illusion", so the GPL-guy's
> propaganda is unable to have any impact on my thinking.

What's so superior about closed source, abandoned software? The minute big business decides to break hardware and software compatibility, you're screwed anyways. At least some people try to make things work (or continue to work) to the best of their ability instead of throwing everything away. MS couldn't give a crap about DOS or OS/2 or Win16 or even Win9x anymore (even XP is almost obsoleted by them). No, I don't think you should delete a perfectly fine working MS-DOS install, but at the same time, e.g. I don't think their DEBUG is really up to snuff, SMARTDRV could be improved, EDIT is too weak for my tastes, codepage support is less than stellar, etc. And if you think their kernel doesn't have bugs, you're wrong:

* 2165, BUG: nonfunctional in MS-DOS 4.00 through 7.10 (Win98) due to a bug (the code sets a pointer depending on the high bit of AL, but doesn't clear the bit before branching by function number).  Supported and functional(!) in Novell DOS 7 (Update 15), as well as PC-DOS 7 and OS/2 MVDM

* 2F1230, BUG:  Win95-OSR2 is reported to have a bug that can potentially corrupt memory if SFT tables are "arranged poorly"

* 2F1231, BUG:  Windows98 will crash the system if DL>02h on entry due to an off-by-1 conditional jump; if the jump were correct, the function would return CF set/AX=0001h as for Windows95


Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
15297 Postings in 1378 Threads, 254 registered users, 14 users online (0 registered, 14 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum