Index
> DOS > DOS died? :-(Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
| Author |
|
|
DEMON 09 Oct 2004, 18:09
What are you think about significance of learning programing under DOS today?..
|
|||
09 Oct 2004, 18:09 |
|
|
Matrix 09 Oct 2004, 19:05
Dos has not died
but MATRIX has you MATRIX |
|||
|
09 Oct 2004, 19:05 |
|
|
ASHLEY4 09 Oct 2004, 19:24
Dos is back! ,M$ remade it, http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1156389,00.asp
and it run's the xbox. All we need is a free pmode Dos  .
\\\\||//// (@@) ASHLEY4. |
|||
|
09 Oct 2004, 19:24 |
|
|
DEMON 09 Oct 2004, 19:36
Matrix wrote: Dos has not died I like DOS too  |
|||
|
09 Oct 2004, 19:36 |
|
|
veach1 09 Oct 2004, 19:52
What about FREEDOS and DOS7.10?
No, no, no! DOS is not dead, DOS is alive! |
|||
|
09 Oct 2004, 19:52 |
|
|
DEMON 09 Oct 2004, 20:54
IMHO, DOS is alive for programers, not for users...
|
|||
|
09 Oct 2004, 20:54 |
|
|
Matrix 09 Oct 2004, 22:05
ASHLEY4 wrote: Dos is back! ,M$ remade it, http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1156389,00.asp Hy, what about Free-Dos ?
just an example MATRIX |
|||
|
09 Oct 2004, 22:05 |
|
|
crc 10 Oct 2004, 11:53
|
|||
|
10 Oct 2004, 11:53 |
|
|
ASHLEY4 10 Oct 2004, 16:44
I am sorry, but i would of loved Freedos32 to be the answer, (i would not have to start to make my own OS).
It just does not do any thing  .
I would be better off with freedos and dpmi, i have tryed them all. The last time i tryed freedos32, was about April 2004. \\\\||//// (@@) ASHLEY4. |
|||
|
10 Oct 2004, 16:44 |
|
|
crc 10 Oct 2004, 18:17
Quote: We need modern dos, 32bit pmode up to 4GB memory, run's in ring0, with full range of interrupts for programmers(not v86, but real pmode int ), thats what "Dos Extreme" is. What do you mean by "full range of interrupts"? Would this be a 32-bit version of int $21, or provide more functions than DOS did? |
|||
|
10 Oct 2004, 18:17 |
|
|
ASHLEY4 10 Oct 2004, 21:49
A 32bit version of int 21h, but written for 32bit pmode use's, NOT as in using v86 or switching to realmode calling a int 21h (if dos was there) and going back to pmode.
Also it should be module, so you can add and take away drivers etc, with out rebooting. In memory there will be space reserved for modules,dma,kernel,etc these will be about 10 MB. then there will be the rest of memory for program use's. As a single tasking OS, there will be only one program runing in this space at a time, once the program as finish then the next program will over run this space. If you want to do like you would in Dos with a tsr program, you make a module in stead. You can even add a module for multitasking if you wanted to. We got desktop OS like ,linux ,xp ,menuet etc. But what if you want to run a single program, that monitors electronics all day, or runs a mp3 player, or you build a arcade cabinet do you want xp runing in the back ground, slowing it down ?. \\\\||//// (@@) ASHLEY4. |
|||
|
10 Oct 2004, 21:49 |
|
|
crc 11 Oct 2004, 00:31
Quote: In memory there will be space reserved for modules,dma,kernel,etc these will be about 10 MB. then there will be the rest of memory for program use's. And there's the problem: reserved memory. 10MB is a luxery on the systems I still run DOS on. My OS is pmode, but runs quite well with as little as 1MB of RAM. What about users of 386/486 based machines with 2-4MB of RAM? How will this work for them? Quote: But what if you want to run a single program, that monitors electronics all day, or runs a mp3 player, or you build a arcade cabinet do you want xp runing in the back ground, slowing it down ?. I'd run a minimal, custom kernel with the app built in. No need for a separate OS if you just want to run one program all the time |
|||
|
11 Oct 2004, 00:31 |
|
|
ASHLEY4 11 Oct 2004, 11:21
Quote:
I would have a light version for 386/486, also most of these would be better using realmode. Quote:
I am real fan of this idea, thats Y i started dev "BPI" (Bootable Program Interface). But it ends up being used as a OS makes free for all .
Then i thought about loading one program call defalt, but then its a waste of disk space. \\\\||//// (@@) ASHLEY4. |
|||
|
11 Oct 2004, 11:21 |
|
|
Matrix 11 Oct 2004, 15:25
ASHLEY4,
please why whould you need to reserve 10MB of ram? what application of a kernel whould need such a deadly amount of memory? i whouldn't just reserve so much, some options should be variable, maeby someone don't need 4MB Diskcache or ... MATRIX |
|||
|
11 Oct 2004, 15:25 |
|
|
ASHLEY4 11 Oct 2004, 15:52
Matrix, this 10MB is a space for things that mostly stay put as in drivers, kernel etc,but then the rest of memory can be used by the program running.
It may not be 10MB maybe 10% of total ram. There will be no paging etc. \\\\||//// (@@) ASHLEY4. |
|||
|
11 Oct 2004, 15:52 |
|
|
bubach 11 Oct 2004, 20:11
hmm.. i posted before but that must have dissapeared.. ?
you are coding in fasm, you won't need 10mb of memory... thats just your guess, right? my guess is that it would take up maybe 10% more then the binarys.. and i don't think your binarys will take 10mb... Last edited by bubach on 13 Feb 2012, 14:12; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
11 Oct 2004, 20:11 |
|
|
ASHLEY4 11 Oct 2004, 20:24
Once you get in to a pmode OS there is stuff you should, if you want to do say 24bit graphic, cd/dvd access etc, store like if you scan a dvd for files, dir etc, there are look up tables you can store, these are still big.
\\\\||//// (@@) ASHLEY4. |
|||
|
11 Oct 2004, 20:24 |
|
|
Matrix 11 Oct 2004, 23:14
ASHLEY4 wrote: Once you get in to a pmode OS there is stuff you should, if you want to do say 24bit graphic, cd/dvd access etc, store like if you scan a dvd for files, dir etc, there are look up tables you can store, these are still big. You must be a professional, since when you are writing your code so it will be about 10MB when it is finished?   
MATRIX |
|||
|
11 Oct 2004, 23:14 |
|
|
ASHLEY4 11 Oct 2004, 23:48
Sorry i forgot some people still, have very old pc with 64MB of ram
.
I use that sort of pc for raising my monitor up  .
\\\\||//// (@@) ASHLEY4. |
|||
|
11 Oct 2004, 23:48 |
|
| Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|