DOSEMU for Puppy

Message

Bruce B · #16 Post by **Bruce B** » Fri 02 Sep 2005, 06:21

I just installed and tested Windows 3.11 on DOS 6.22 in the Bochs emulator. I'm please to say that it works great. I didn't try and configure the network or printer, but it does run all the applications well at relatively good speed.

I expect within a week or so I'll have a Bochs dotpup kit put together to make for easy installation and configuration. You'll have to provide your own the Microsoft software, the kit will have FreeDOS to get you up and running.

Here's a screenshot of Puppy running Windows 3.11

Lobster · #17 Post by **Lobster** » Fri 02 Sep 2005, 07:11

We are not worthy. We are not worthy.

Have made this a news item for Sep 2 05
http://www.goosee.com/puppy/wikka/LatestNews

I was just staring at the image slobbering . . . (do you pity me for my MS addictions? - so be it . . .)
What intrigues me (again and again) is not what people might do with Puppy but what they ARE doing. Gosh I am glad you went ahead with this . . .

Good luck

BarryK · #18 Post by **BarryK** » Fri 02 Sep 2005, 09:47

That's great!

Thinking back to when I used win 3.11, it was okay, of course the 8.3 filename limit -- I wonder, any workaround for that these days?

Lobster · #19 Post by **Lobster** » Fri 02 Sep 2005, 10:11

As far as I am aware FreeDos has support for larger filenames (or did they go for compatibility with limits)

I had 3.11 running with 8 meg ram on a 386SX - it was fast and sweet.

MS said 95 would run faster on the same equipment. They lied. They have been lying ever since. At that time an extra 8 meg of memory was expensive.

PS. (I still like XP)

mouldy · #20 Post by **mouldy** » Fri 02 Sep 2005, 17:32

Frankly win3.1 ran best on early pentiums. Much better than on earlier computers. My ex bought an early pentium with 3.1 installed. Very stable on that machine. Finally with advent of pentiums, 3.1 had enough resources not to crash. Course 3.1 was ditched soon after pentiums showed up and those with 3.1 switched to win95 cause M$ said it was vastly superior (for a small additional upgrade fee of course) which then got them back to the familiar blue screen of death.

Geoworks (GeOS) is the best system on 386/486. That was a rock solid operating system. So much better than win3.1 but the ruthless M$ marketing juggernaught left it dieing alongside the roadway. Sameway BeOS was much better than win9x, but got crushed.

And with all due respect to the clawsman, I aint wild about XP.Sure dont like taking it online due to all the cleanup/updates/protection necessary. On top of that, though its more stable than win9x, its stability sure isnt anything to brag about compared to better versions of linux. Dont know, maybe like 3.1, it is more stable on newer faster computers than what it was originally designed for. Just keep it around for occasional off line use for few things where available software is better than under linux. Even then, figure I'll have to freshly install it every once in a while.

EarlSmith · #21 Post by **EarlSmith** » Fri 02 Sep 2005, 23:34

It is wonderful to hear and see win 3.11 running in Puppy. But since dos 6.22 is not free, although I do have copies of it, and not to rain on the parade, but have you tried it in drdos. I do have free copies of it I would be happy to share. It is one of the latest, I think 7.something. I used it for quite some time and was very happy with it. Really liked the Format command, it would format Linux partitions.

#22 Post by **Pizzasgood** » Sat 03 Sep 2005, 01:09

Hmmm.....So would it be possible to run Win98SE from this? Because then I would never have to leave Puppy! Pretty much the only thing I use Windows for anymore is Byond, and although there is a Linux version, it is text only. I rarely play my other PC games anymore (I prefer counsels/handhelds), but I kind of enjoy Byond every now and then. And I could run QB from Puppy too! I have moved to c++, but this would make translating a program I wrote in QB to c++ a lot easier. I could even run Basic4GL too! Sweet! Keep up the good work, man!

*starts singing "Don't bring me down, Bruce"*

rarsa · #23 Post by **rarsa** » Sat 03 Sep 2005, 04:54

Is this thread for real?

Are there people really using DOS in personal computers?

I know that in some companies there may be one or two legacy custom built applications running in a dusty corner. But runing DOS at home?

What applications are there for DOS that do not exist for modern Operating systems?

I am not critizicing I am just blown away by the activity of this thread.

So don't get me wrong, I programmed in DOS for a long time even at the interruption level. But it was LONG time ago...

Maybe that means that some people are still using the DOS applications I wrote...

How curious... This thread feels totally retro. As if I were traveling back in time.

(BTW, my questions are rethorical questions, they don't require an answer)

stevoomba · #24 Post by **stevoomba** » Sat 03 Sep 2005, 05:07

Not to attempt answering your rhetorical questions or anything, but dos is alive and well and has modern applications being written and ported - just do some googling. It's the best antidote to bloatware around, and it's nice to feel closer to the machine. FreeDOS http://www.freedos.org/ is still only in beta .9.x and gradually creeping towards stable hopefully within a year.

#25 Post by **Pizzasgood** » Sat 03 Sep 2005, 06:10

I'm old school, man! I randomly start whistleing the theme for Super Mario Bros. One of my favorite songs is "Old Time Rock and Roll." I believe children should be spanked till they can't feel it anymore. I miss the days when teachers could whop a student, and I didn't even exist back then. I scare my mom when she's listing to songs she grew up with and I start belting out the lyrics, and I know them better than she does! I believe most "modern" cars look like something that came out of the backide of a grizzly bear, and think they should bring back the fins. I like all things diesel. I don't trust computers any farther than they can jump. I still think of Sega when I think of Nintendo's biggest rival. And most of all, when I think of programming, I think of QBasic.

And like I said, if I can get Win98SE going, I won't need to leave Puppy for Windows.

Glitchman · #26 Post by **Glitchman** » Sat 03 Sep 2005, 21:16

Bruce B wrote:Also, you could make an MS-DOS setup version 5.00 thru 7.00 which should be able to run Windows 3.11

Actually, you can run Windows 3.x on top of DOS 7.1 too (the DOS that underlies all versions of Windows from 95 OSR2 through Windows 98 SE.) The trick involves googling OSR2fix, which patches your IO.SYS to allow older versions of Windows to run. They have more detailed instructions, but basically you need to make a batch file to launch Windows and may have to modify the SYSTEM.INI file if you have a lot of RAM.

The advantage of doing this is that you can take full advantage of relatively large disks by using FAT32 instead of FAT16 (which previous versions of DOS were limited to.) Sure, there are some glitches, as File Manager always thinks I only have 1.99 GB of hard drive space free, but it works. I have been using the OSR2fix patch for years without any problems.

Windows for Workgroups 3.11 flies on my Pentium 3 and sees my entire 512 MB of RAM. No emulator needed here.

ChiJoan · #27 Post by **ChiJoan** » Fri 09 Sep 2005, 10:36

rarsa wrote:Is this thread for real?

Are there people really using DOS in personal computers?

I know that in some companies there may be one or two legacy custom built applications running in a dusty corner. But runing DOS at home?

What applications are there for DOS that do not exist for modern Operating systems?

I am not critizicing I am just blown away by the activity of this thread.

So don't get me wrong, I programmed in DOS for a long time even at the interruption level. But it was LONG time ago...

Maybe that means that some people are still using the DOS applications I wrote...

How curious... This thread feels totally retro. As if I were traveling back in time.

(BTW, my questions are rethorical questions, they don't require an answer)

Hi,

I have plenty of DOS, Win 3.11, and Win 95/98 only software and CDs. As long as they run I keep them. I have my old XT 8mhz clone with a CopyIIpc Option Board, too. I still have stuff that only worked with Basica, IBM's Basic Chip.

Any chance converting an old Rummy 500 to Puppy, it used an old .dll file that I guess was either Qbasic or VB? It doesn't quite look like anything I've found recently to my memory.

Come to think of the ruckous OS/2 fans are throwing at IBM dropping it, and petitions for Open Sourcing it. We really cling to stuff we know.

Thanks for your hard work guys,
ChiJoan

Perkins · #28 Post by **Perkins** » Wed 28 Sep 2005, 07:08

DOS is actually kind of a nice operating system once you get used to it. I've got an old 486DX that I use with MS-DOS 6.22 and I can make the thing sit up and talk. Literally. I have a few neat programs for playing digital sound files over the PC speaker. My favourite is Hal saying, "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."

If I can manage to get puppy to actually work on my laptop (I hate Toshiba) a DOS emulator will be very useful. I've got several really neat programs that access memory in ways that XP doesn't like or permit, and Window$ is such a CPU hog that most of the emulators I've found for it don't run decently. Something clean and decent to use sounds like a really good idea. The people who wrote programs back when 640K of memory was a lot were geniuses. It would be a shame to waste their efforts.

Oh, just for people who are curious. You can actually run Dos 6.22 on an Intel 80/86.

Humms like a top, and is perfect for all those cases where you need some cheap control circuitry. I use one for a temperature controler on my foundary.

DanRanger · #29 Post by **DanRanger** » Fri 30 Sep 2005, 04:12

Try this as an alternative to dosemu: dosbox
http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/
It runs on Linux and 64-Bit Edition of Windows XP.
Danny

Perkins · #30 Post by **Perkins** » Mon 10 Oct 2005, 01:00

Hmmm... I did try the windows version of that one. A lot of my old programs actually seemed to run worse with it. But that's probably just my crazy machine not giving the emulator enough CPU time. I'd forgotten it had a Linux version. I'll take a look.

Ben · #31 Post by **Ben** » Wed 19 Oct 2005, 06:06

Downloaded, installed, many times, yet no success.
Nothing happens, I don't get a Z prompt.

Any idea?

Ben

#32 Post by MU » Wed 19 Oct 2005, 12:43

There is a Dosbox-Dotpup.
See the thread for libraries needed:

http://www.murga.org/%7Epuppy/viewtopic.php?t=2941

Mark

lawquest · #33 Post by **lawquest** » Tue 21 Nov 2006, 09:15

"Can someone (or several someones) give a few examples of the DOS programs they would be able to run with an emulator? No hurry, just curious."

I still use foxpro 2.6. I suppose it would run on dosbox but it runs great on dosemu. Open Office now reads foxpro (dbase) files.

#34 Post by **Pizzasgood** » Wed 22 Nov 2006, 01:49

First thing in my head would be... QBASIC!!! I only messed with it for two months, but it was fun. Far superior to TI-83+ Basic, which is what I had been using off and on for several years prior to that. Then I did a little Basic4GL and C++, then moved into PHP for a bit. Now I've been doing Bash for a couple years.

GuestToo · #35 Post by **GuestToo** » Wed 22 Nov 2006, 02:01

freebasic is very similar (but more powerful) ... it was designed to be compatible with quickbasic syntax
http://www.freebasic.net/

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

DOSEMU for Puppy

Would you like a DOS emulator for Puppy?

WfW 3.11 works on DOS 7.1 too

You always remember first loves...

DosBox

Oops, dosbox doesn't run on my Puppy 1.0.5