DOS ain't dead

Good news for everyone!
Georg Pothaust (author of DOSUSB) started to work on an universal AC97 driver for DOS.
Look here:
http://www.georgpotthast.de/dossound/

---
DOS-u-akbar!

> Georg Pothaust (author of DOSUSB) started to work on an universal AC97
> driver for DOS. Look here:
> http://www.georgpotthast.de/dossound/

Nice, but if I understand well, this driver only defines some new sound API so it is usefull only for your new programs which will use this API. It will not help to existing programs requiring SoundBlaster. As we can see working with new soundcards is not impossible under DOS - e.g. MPXPlay and QuickView already have nice sound support. And MPXplay sources are free so you can grab the drivers from there (unfortunatelly WC/ASM instead of DJGPP). What will costs George's source license? 1000$ like that for USB? No thanks

---
DOS gives me freedom to unlimited HW access.

> Good news for everyone!
> Georg Pothaust (author of DOSUSB) started to work on an universal AC97
> driver for DOS.
> Look here:
> http://www.georgpotthast.de/dossound/

Better would have been if he would have written a DIGPACK driver or would have implemented another API used in the past for DOS modular sound card drivers instead.

---
Glory to God for all things

> Better would have been if he would have written a DIGPACK driver or would
> have implemented another API used in the past for DOS modular sound card
> drivers instead.

Exactly
I had the same idea and already mailed to Georg about making a DIGPAK compatible version. He wrote that he'll try to do it so maybe it'll became a reality.
However his API has one advantage - it allows easily to play files bigger than 64KB in real mode.

---
DOS-u-akbar!

> Georg Pothaust (author of DOSUSB) started to work on an universal AC97 driver for DOS.



> Nice, but if I understand well, this driver only defines some new sound API
> so it is usefull only for your new programs which will use this API. It will not
> help to existing programs requiring SoundBlaster.

Regrettably "SoundBlaster" is a brain-dead "technology" (and DOS the only "OS" unable to drop it finally) anyway so "new API" is indeed the only way to go

> unfortunatelly WC/ASM instead of DJGPP

WC(=loo)/ASM is bad while DGJPP would be good ?

> Better would have been if he would have written a DIGPACK driver or
> would have implemented another API used in the past for DOS modular
> sound card drivers instead.

Maybe, and the API spec is available at ???

> He wrote that he'll try to do it so maybe it'll became a reality.

OK, as long as there are some docs and not too many usage restrictions (patents/(C)) ...

> However his API has one advantage

He just made a INT controlled WAV player, so in fact there is no "API" ...

> it allows easily to play files bigger than 64KB in real mode.

Tried to invoke his "driver" while performing other file I/O ?

BTW, there is a silent update, the original version had a "Does-not-work-at-all-BUG"

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

> > Better would have been if he would have written a DIGPACK driver or
> > would have implemented another API used in the past for DOS modular
> > sound card drivers instead.
>
> Maybe, and the API spec is available at ???

For example search for dmkit150.zip.
BTW, why do you not reply separately to different posts? Are you too lazy, or what?

EDIT: See also RBIL, int 66h. In fact they are called DIGPAK drivers, not DIGPACK, my apologies.

---
Glory to God for all things

> For example search for dmkit150.zip

I will.

> BTW, why do you not reply separately to different posts? Are you too lazy

NO.

> or what?

I'm not participating in the "get most posts irrespective usefulness" challenge

> EDIT: See also RBIL, int 66h.

I will. http://www.ctyme.com/intr/int-66.htm

BTW, Georg's "driver" now DOES work in DOS and "enables" multitasking. ... I brewed a FASM example, still, his approach is not very professional.

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

> I'm not participating in the "get most posts irrespective usefulness"
> challenge

OK, but don't expect always to get an answer.

> BTW, Georg's "driver" now DOES work in DOS and "enables" multitasking. ...
> I brewed a FASM example, still, his approach is not very professional.

Then show us yourself the professional way, the documentation for AC97 is freely available, there is enough DOS source code on-line and it seems you have a lot of spare time.

---
Glory to God for all things

> Then show us yourself the professional way

COOL.

> What will costs George's source license? 1000$ like that for USB? No thanks

Feel free to release more free and more open source USB and sound drivers, the documentation for AC97 as well as UHCI/OHCI/EHCI is freely available and you apparently are interested

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

> Regrettably "SoundBlaster" is a brain-dead "technology" (and DOS the only
> "OS" unable to drop it finally) anyway so "new API" is indeed the only way
> to go

But SB was standard and there are thousands of existing apps so I'd rather like to have some working SB-AC97 emulator for DOS instead of some API. As I said some drivers already exists so who wants make new he can take mpxplay sources.

As I work in DJGPP and know some system specific I simply prefer sources for DJGPP than sources for WC which are in useless form for DJGPP (it would need many many hours to rewrite it to form that will compile under DJGPP). But it's my problem, so ignore it :)

---
DOS gives me freedom to unlimited HW access.

> But SB was standard and there are thousands of existing apps so I'd rather
> like to have some working SB-AC97 emulator for DOS instead of some API. As
> I said some drivers already exists so who wants make new he can take
> mpxplay sources.

A solid DOS oriented API for accessing sound cards still doesn't exist! IMO the old DIGPAK API, even relatively poor and obsolete, is nevertheless still the best. First let's have a DOS modern API for accessing the sound cards (implemented by loadable drivers) and later we could think how to emulate Sound Blaster.

---
Glory to God for all things

> A solid DOS oriented API for accessing sound cards still doesn't exist!
> IMO the old DIGPAK API, even relatively poor and obsolete, is nevertheless
> still the best.

Well but who needs it? are you (not you personaly but few dos programmers here) planning to start making hundreds of sound apps? I would rather update allegro or midas library to support new cars if someone needs...

---
DOS gives me freedom to unlimited HW access.

> Well but who needs it? are you (not you personaly but few dos programmers
> here) planning to start making hundreds of sound apps? I would rather
> update allegro or midas library to support new cards if someone needs...

VESA VBE/AI was a good idea, sadly that because of various reasons it didn't become a standard. Ask yourself what would have meant for DOS in case most sound cards would have had VESA VBE/AI support. For me something similar would have been the cleanest approach for accessing sound cards in DOS.
But as you further imply, why to bother even to update allegro or midas for the very few who would need such a thing, when most emulators/VMs have very good support for SB (and in some situations even for GUS). If we have nothing better to do we can continue to write SB code, run it in emulator/VM and be happy.

---
Glory to God for all things

> > or what?
>
> I'm not participating in the "get most posts irrespective usefulness"
> challenge

Or you just didn't understand the threaded view, which is the key difference between a board and a forum.

---
Forum admin

> > A solid DOS oriented API for accessing sound cards still doesn't exist!
> > IMO the old DIGPAK API, even relatively poor and obsolete, is
> nevertheless
> > still the best.
>
> Well but who needs it? are you (not you personaly but few dos programmers
> here) planning to start making hundreds of sound apps?

That's a very cynical view. You can talk yourself out of anything with reasoning like that.

> I would rather update allegro or midas library to support new cars
> if someone needs...

Allegro has dropped DJGPP support. Your best bet (in theory) would be to use the latest patched version used by RAINE:

> Allegro 4.2.2, patched for a better dos support : it's really a pity
> that I am obliged to host that here, but since allegro seems to enjoy
> to break things which worked in its developpement versions and then
> delete the developpement versions from their site, it's better to
> keep a patched version here. The patches are only for the djgpp
> versions, but this one should work with any os anyway.
> allegro-4.2.2.tar.bz2

hi everyone.

old thread, but i'm a new user.

This topic is interesting to me because I (back in 2002) wrote an AC97 .wav player for DOS. I open sourced it, and placed it on programmer's heaven:
http://www.programmersheaven.com/download/23237/download.aspx

so I checked out the stuff that georgpotthast was doing:
http://www.georgpotthast.de/dossound/index.htm

Sure enough, there's some chunks of my original source code in his work.
I didn't license any of my source-it's truly open and freeware; do with it what you wish. georgpotthast has absolutely taken my work to a new level-it's more robust and supports way more devices than mine ever did-kudos to him for this.

My concern is, that like his USB drivers, if he is looking to charge a pile of cash for his work, then this gets a little disturbing for me. I open sourced my project in the spirit of keeping things free and open, not to allow someone else to profit from the work I did.

I have not asked him what he's planning on doing; the site doesn't say that there is a cost for a license or for the source code. I have not (to my knowledge) had any contact with him.

This is a first for me; I'm not really sure what I should do. I'm flattered that someone is using my code in their own projects of course, but not so much flattered if he's out cruising in a new yacht because of my work...

> hi everyone.
>
> old thread, but i'm a new user.

Heh, actually old user, you just never posted much.

> This topic is interesting to me because I (back in 2002) wrote an AC97
> .wav player for DOS. I open sourced it, and placed it on programmer's
> heaven:
> http://www.programmersheaven.com/download/23237/download.aspx

Seen it but my one attempt didn't work (I'm not that familiar with soundcards or even barely know whatever the heck my machines have, ugh, SB Live vs. EMU10k1 vs. AC97 vs. Intel HDA vs. SB16 ?????).

> so I checked out the stuff that georgpotthast was doing:
> http://www.georgpotthast.de/dossound/index.htm
>
> Sure enough, there's some chunks of my original source code in his work.
> I didn't license any of my source-it's truly open and freeware; do with it
> what you wish. georgpotthast has absolutely taken my work to a new
> level-it's more robust and supports way more devices than mine ever
> did-kudos to him for this.

He's actually done a few interesting things. And a lot is freeware, at least, so that's nice.

> My concern is, that like his USB drivers, if he is looking to charge a
> pile of cash for his work, then this gets a little disturbing for me. I
> open sourced my project in the spirit of keeping things free and open, not
> to allow someone else to profit from the work I did.
>
> I have not asked him what he's planning on doing; the site doesn't say
> that there is a cost for a license or for the source code. I have not (to
> my knowledge) had any contact with him.

I'm pretty sure you won't get sources without paying for them. (I think Rayer's COMPAQ EVO USB keyboard issues weren't initially resolved too well [until Bret?], and I think Georg even wanted him to buy a license just to fix it!)

> This is a first for me; I'm not really sure what I should do. I'm
> flattered that someone is using my code in their own projects of course,
> but not so much flattered if he's out cruising in a new yacht because of
> my work...

I seriously doubt he's making much money, if any. Certainly not enough to buy a yacht. He's probably just a poor sap trying to eek out some extra money.

Ironically, DOS is often called "dead and crap and useless", yet people (id, Sierra) still sell and make money off it (and MS will still whine "in 2009!" if you download their old DOS stuff illegally). Also, the entire DOS software ecosystem is much more of the "freeware closed source" attitude than elsewhere. Don't ask me why.

Legally, (although I'm no lawyer!) I would think he's in the clear since he's heavily modified your work, plus you never specifically prohibited commercial use, did you?

But in my heart I feel for you. I understand how weird it feels, and yes definitely we should have more open drivers! (Although, I guess to be completely fair, sound isn't normally essential to using computers. BUT ... who the heck wants hardware that doesn't work??? Enough with the Win32-only drivers, silly world!!) NDAs and software patents seem to be self-defeating in some ways. "But we gotta eat!" (bah, it's not like food grows on trees or anything).

Dumb rhetorical question: why the heck must we reinvent the wheel a thousand times due to bad licenses, closed source, bugs, new APIs, forced deprecation, etc.? Wouldn't it be better to standardize this stuff? (Or does virtualization and emulation minimize and/or correct the damage?)

> old thread, but i'm a new user.
> This topic is interesting to me because I (back in 2002) wrote an AC97
> .wav player for DOS. I open sourced it, and placed it on programmer's
> http://www.programmersheaven.com/download/23237/download.aspx

> Submitted By: jeffleyda
> Rating: (Rate It)
> Share: By Email

So you are the same person as "jeffleyda" ?

> A simple command line .wav player that uses the intel 810/815
> (anything with an ICH2 southbridge with AC'97 audio device). No
> drivers required, full source (ASM) provided.

Interesting, I'll test

> Sure enough, there's some chunks of my original source code in his work.
> I didn't license any of my source-it's truly open and freeware; do with it
> what you wish. georgpotthast has absolutely taken my work to a new
> level-it's more robust and supports way more devices than mine ever
> did-kudos to him for this.

> My concern is, that like his USB drivers, if he is looking to charge a
> pile of cash for his work, then this gets a little disturbing for me.

"readme.txt" wrote

> It's free, do with it what you will. I don't particularly care.

But you did put it into de-facto Public Domain

> I have not (to my knowledge) had any contact with him.

You can do it now ...

> This is a first for me; I'm not really sure what I should do. I'm
> flattered that someone is using my code in their own projects of course,
> but not so much flattered if he's out cruising in a new yacht because of
> my work...

I doubt that DOSSOUND generates any spectacular or even "sufficient" profit, some people simply think that work has to be paid. Both DOSUSB and DOSSOUND are free for personal use, OTOH next version of DOSUSB possibly won't, because the author is frustrated too: about companies using DOSUSB but not paying an "unknown one-man company somewhere in the East AKA in Germany"

Rugxulo wrote:

> Ironically, DOS is often called "dead and crap and useless", yet
> people (id, Sierra) still sell and make money off it

as long as people advertise it

> the entire DOS software ecosystem is much more of
> the "freeware closed source" attitude than elsewhere. Don't ask me why.

Ecosystem of "DOSsers" not having DOS ? How many times I had to whine about "DOS" stuff not working in DOS ? Hint: this forum is a good point to start the search

> Legally, (although I'm no lawyer!) I would think he's in the clear since

the original code was Public Domain, point.

> times due to bad licenses, closed source, bugs, new APIs, forced deprecation

Of what ??? Deprecation of ME or OSama/2 is good

> Or does virtualization and emulation minimize and/or correct the damage?

NO.

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

> I doubt that DOSSOUND generates any spectacular or even "sufficient"
> profit, some people simply think that work has to be paid.

Me too. Yes, I think, my work should be paid by my employer. Don't you have to pay any bills?

---
Forum admin

> > old thread, but i'm a new user.
>
> Heh, actually old user, you just never posted much.

Nope. The original DOSferatu was from www.imperial-games.de, but he never logged in or wrote a single posting. So I've recycled this account now. The new DOSferatu is Jeff Leyda (Flopper, Throttle).

---
Forum admin

> > I doubt that DOSSOUND generates any spectacular or even "sufficient"
> > profit, some people simply think that work has to be paid.
>
> Me too. Yes, I think, my work should be paid by my employer. Don't
> you have to pay any bills?

Should every action cost money? Nobody's that rich to pay for every little breath, drink, bite, shelter, etc. I'm not sure I agree with some that capitalism is evil, but unrestrained it can go haywire! (And communism is flat-out bad.)

Maybe the "bounty" system (a la some other third-party OSes) is what needs to be done a lot more, even for DOS: raise enough, hire somebody, etc. The problem is that most coders charge ridiculous amounts! And it would have to be the difficult and/or heavily-desired stuff, not the easy / useless stuff (although even simple bugfixes are greatly appreciated). But how do you give some to one person without making someone else jealous (or infuriating someone who already gave away their work for free)??

rr wrote:

> Nope. The original DOSferatu was from
> www.imperial-games.de, but he
> never logged in or wrote a single posting. So I've recycled this account
> now. The new DOSferatu is Jeff

Good to know

I wrote:

> Interesting, I'll test

Done ! The story is short: It doesn't work - "No ICH2 sound device found"


PHICH.ZIP "23237-23237.zip" 20'705
F946F6EDC2C2CF36FB16380C4DC7BBF6

"http://www.programmersheaven.com/download/23237/download.aspx"

File Name: 23237.zip
Product homepage: Unknown
Order page: Unknown
Languages: Unknown
Platforms: Intel
Release date: 9/2/2002
License: Unknown
Size: 20 KiB
Price/Fee (US$): Unknown
Number of downloads: 3702

Comments (3)

Totally awesome piece of code!
Posted by: Mars on Tuesday, September 02, 2003

Hi, Real Great work neatly done. Thanks for your effort.
I've made few modifications to support ICH4 and above.
Will send those to you soon.

Modified for ICH5
Posted by: Carlo on Monday, May 05, 2008

I modified Jeff's code to suit TASM syntax and got it to
also run on an ICH5 based system. When I tested both ICH2
and ICH5 programs, I found the wav files (e.g. chimes.wav
from WinXP) play too quickly. I'm not sure if this is just a
wav file format issue. Any tips would be greatly appreciated.

ICH AC97 DOS I/O
Posted by: Richard on Monday, February 16, 2009

Thank you very much. Source files to, WOW!


Did you get the ^^^ improved code supporting higher ICH than ICH2 as noted in the comments ?

Even worse, the new DOSferatu wrote also a ENS 1371/1373 player (I'll test later) :


PHENS.ZIP "30122-30122.zip" 26'435
EA344D009B2ECB670338A639E6A3458A

"http://www.programmersheaven.com/download/30122/download.aspx"

File Name: 30122.zip
Product homepage: Unknown
Order page: Unknown
Languages: Unknown
Platforms: Unknown
Release date: 10/4/2003
License: Unknown
Size: 25 KiB
Price/Fee (US$): Unknown
Number of downloads: 1888

Comments (1)

Programmer
Posted by: Joshua Lowry on Saturday, January 17, 2004

Excellent piece of code. Takes a complex problem and makes it look easy.


BTW, the size of the ICH2 player is just 1 KiB, and the ENS player just 2 KiB, compare to Alex Hint's drivers cca 10 KiB, and some ME driver VXD's bloated to incredible several MiB

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

> So you are the same person as "jeffleyda" ?

I am. hello!

>
> Interesting, I'll test

yeah, my program on PH is really old. 2002. It was a single solution for a single piece of hardware that I needed it to work on, then decided that I'd give it to the rest of the world because there was ZERO AC97 stuff out there at the time, and I spent lots of hours figuring it out.

I do have an updated version of it that supports a half dozen more ICH chips, but haven't put that one online.

> "readme.txt" wrote
>
> > It's free, do with it what you will. I don't particularly care.
>
> But you did put it into de-facto Public Domain

Yes. I know that I have absolutely no recourse for him "stealing" my work or violating any terms; i wouldn't even pursue it if I did have any rights to claim. I'm also quite confident that he's not making any money off it, certainly not sailing on a yaht; that was a bit of hyperbole.

I guess what I'm getting at, and most certainly didn't describe it well in my post, as I was still in shock, was:

a) should i even care. should i care that he's charging money.
b) should i contact him, and what angle should i take
c) should i request my code be removed, or just a thanks be added to his documentation.

in the past, others who have used my work contacted me. either for a little bit of tech support, or to at least announce that they're doing something with it. [my code is being used in at least 2 video gambling machines in 2 different countries] I'm totally cool with that. those guys are making money with my work, but at least they were honest with me and contacted me ahead of time. this is different, it's a little weird. i disassembled portions of his .com file and saw my source pop up. that's freaky!

when i read through this thread and saw that he wanted some serious money for the USB drivers, then I got a little worried that this guy might not be doing these things for the pleasure of solving a problem, and wanted to know if your collectiveness had ever dealt with the guy before.

Hi Jeff,
Glad to see you participating here, a good crowd and great to see it grow !

> a) should i even care. should i care that he's charging money.
Yes I think you should. It is your code and you sent a lot of time on it.

> b) should i contact him, and what angle should i take
Yes. Be nice, explain that you've noticed he has included some of your source code but hasn't given you any credit etc. He may have overlooked it, e.g. I've recently noticed (purely by chance) a similar unintentional omission, I let the person concerned know and they are now aware and are fixing it.

It's very easy to forget even libraries credits when caught up in the midst of lots of code. So be aware it may just be a mistake in terms of him not calling out your name. The financial side though is I feel a different point but I would suggest contact him politely first and see what he says.

> c) should i request my code be removed, or just a thanks be added to his
> documentation.
If he is using your code then at the very least I think you deserve a credit on the software/documentation. Re removal lets see what happens after you contact him and take it from there.

> > So you are the same person as "jeffleyda" ?
> I am. hello!

Hello and welcome "again"

> I do have an updated version of it that supports a half dozen more ICH
> chips, but haven't put that one online.

Do you intend to release it ? This would be very appreciated

Other usage beyond WAV player:

- DUGL sound drivers (FFK looks for contributors)
- HX WINMM sound drivers

> b) should i contact him, and what angle should i take

Since your release was PD, there is no big fault on his side, just politely ask whether he could give credits to you or open source his driver

> c) should i request my code be removed,

NO.

> or just a thanks be added to his documentation.

YES.

> something with it. [my code is being used in at least 2 video gambling
> machines in 2 different countries]

COOL

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

> > > So you are the same person as "jeffleyda" ?
> > I am. hello!
>
> Hello and welcome "again"
>

yeah.
here I thought that DOSferatu was a clever alias that no one else was using, plus it fit me well (i'm an old goth, and have been a DOS user for 25 years) and then I find that someone has beaten me to the punch, but never used the greatest alias ever. I should probably switch usernames just to avoid any further confusion.



> > I do have an updated version of it that supports a half dozen more ICH
> > chips, but haven't put that one online.
>
> Do you intend to release it ? This would be very appreciated

I'll dig out my latest. I think it only supported up to ICH 5, but this subject has gotten me interested in doing an update to it, and I have access to a few newer boards with some later ICHes on it.


> Since your release was PD, there is no big fault on his side, just
> politely ask whether he could give credits to you or open source his
> driver

I have done just that. We'll see how it goes from there. I was nervous writing the mail itself.

Thank you all for the kind words and advice on handling this. I think/hope that I did it properly without trying to be too assertive.

> > > I do have an updated version of it that supports a half dozen more ICH
> > > chips, but haven't put that one online.
> > Do you intend to release it ? This would be very appreciated
> I'll dig out my latest. I think it only supported up to ICH 5, but this
> subject has gotten me interested in doing an update to it, and I have
> access to a few newer boards with some later ICHes on it.

Please do FFK is looking for contributors for sound support in his DUGL stuff

> I have done just that. We'll see how it goes from there. I was nervous
> writing the mail itself.

Actually Georg's thing is technically better, since it DOES work on at least some newer ICH's for me, while your ICH2-only one doesn't.

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

> Actually Georg's thing is technically better, since it DOES work on
> at least some newer ICH's for me, while your ICH2-only one doesn't.

I agree completely. he's done some great work with it.

And yes, my ICH2 only version probably doesn't work so well on a non ICH2 system. ;)

Let me dig out the code and make some updates to catch up on the newest ICHes, and then I'll re-release my code. It still isn't as cool as Georg's, but at least it's open source.

BTW: I did get a response back from him, credits will be added when he gets a chance. It's all good. Since I never made any demands in my "license" about credits or keeping it open source, he didn't do anything to keep it that way. He's not done anything wrong, it was just the idea of trying to charge money for it that sorta rubbed me the wrong way.

> Let me dig out the code and make some updates to catch up on the newest ICHes, and then I'll re-release my code. It still isn't as cool as Georg's, but at least it's open source.



> response back from him, credits will be added when he gets a chance. It's all good. Since I never made any demands in my "license" about credits or keeping it open source, he didn't do anything to keep it that way. He's not done anything wrong

It's "sometimes" better to brew an agreement than open a war

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***