DOS ain't dead

Link where I noticed it:

http://www.osnews.com/story/21024/Windows_3_1_on_a_Nokia_N95

Screenshots / comments (Polish):

http://www.frazpc.pl/b/232621

sorry

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

> I see no relation to DOS
>
> sorry

Bah, you're such a purist!

DOSBox emulates DOS even on non-x86 platforms.
Win 3.x was a GUI DOS shell / extender for DOS.
Nokia PDAs / phones (or whatever the N95 is) can run both. It's just funny / cool.

Besides, more DOSBox users means more DOS software users, which can't hurt.

> sorry

Huh? The article clearly says: "Sure, it might not be particularly useful or usable, "

I also us DOSBox on my iPAQ 214 but I never tried to install windows inside :P

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

> DOSBox emulates DOS even on non-x86 platforms.
> Win 3.x was a GUI DOS shell / extender for DOS.

Unrelated if he used the DOSBox built-in OS which is in no way DOS or compatible. And he did use it at least for installing or displaying the Windows directory (first few pictures). I wonder whether it runs Windows 3.x well.

> Besides, more DOSBox users means more DOS software users, which can't
> hurt.

More DOSBox users only means more DOS game users, as long as the DOSBox user doesn't run a real DOS inside DOSBox.

---
l

> sorry

Since Win31 is - from a technical point of view - just a GUI application for DOS ( in this regard quite similar to many other attempts ), there is a relation to DOS ... and I can see it.

---
MS-DOS forever!

I see a relation to DOS, it's pretty cool to see old applications may get sense in future again.

> > DOSBox emulates DOS even on non-x86 platforms.
> > Win 3.x was a GUI DOS shell / extender for DOS.
>
> Unrelated if he used the DOSBox built-in OS which is in no way DOS or
> compatible.

Well, it must be a little compatible, at least, to run such a nuisance as Win3x!! (Even FreeDOS can barely run Standard mode. But no FD devs use Win3x so it's not a priority.)

> And he did use it at least for installing or displaying the
> Windows directory (first few pictures). I wonder whether it runs Windows
> 3.x well.

Doubt it, it's probably dirt slow. From what I read, that port of DOSBox only runs 286-class software well and worse with sound enabled.

> > Besides, more DOSBox users means more DOS software users, which can't
> > hurt.
>
> More DOSBox users only means more DOS game users, as long as the DOSBox
> user doesn't run a real DOS inside DOSBox.

It's not a real DOS, but it can run lots of DOS software. It's just the devs (wisely?) decided to focus only on gaming (for now?).

> > > DOSBox emulates DOS even on non-x86 platforms.
> > > Win 3.x was a GUI DOS shell / extender for DOS.
> >
> > Unrelated if he used the DOSBox built-in OS which is in no way DOS or
> > compatible.
>
> Well, it must be a little compatible, at least, to run such a
> nuisance as Win3x!!

See below. It might be compatible with old versions of MS-DOS if you assume you're running on one (and don't try to reboot the machine). Or he did in fact use a real DOS version to run it, and booted this DOS from an image after viewing the Windows directory.

> > > Besides, more DOSBox users means more DOS software users, which can't
> > > hurt.
> >
> > More DOSBox users only means more DOS game users, as long as the DOSBox
> > user doesn't run a real DOS inside DOSBox.
>
> It's not a real DOS, but it can run lots of DOS software.

All my software crashes. Because it often calls tries to call various newer Int21 services, and the DOSBox OS panics on any unknown function. Things like Int19 or jumping to FFFF:0000 also don't work and crash the Box. It is possible to detect whether the software runs in DOSBox, but (A) aborting when DOSBox is detected would also abort when running a real DOS inside DOSBox and (B) I'm certainly not going to include the detection code into every executable just to provide support for the DOSBox OS (either by aborting or not using functions DOSBox OS doesn't know).

> It's just the devs (wisely?) decided to focus only on gaming (for now?).

And this is exactly what troubles me. The DOSBox OS could, with presumably small changes, be a (more or less) compatible DOS but the devs decided against this.

---
l

> Win31 is - from a technical point of view - just a GUI application for DOS

Sadly this "application" used to be sold as Operating System back then, and even worse introduced "new" NE applications that don't run on DOS anymore ("This great program requires Macrosoft Windows")

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

> Bah, you're such a purist!

Did you test before boasting ? Hey, you are probably right this time

> Besides, more DOSBox users means more DOS software users

Maybe one day users of this technology will have to add to "DOS" user base

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

> > Win31 is - from a technical point of view - just a GUI application for
> DOS
>
> Sadly this "application" used to be sold as Operating System back
> then, and even worse introduced "new" NE applications that don't run on
> DOS anymore ("This great program requires Macrosoft Windows")

NE isn't a Windows invention. It's the file format for 16-bit protected-mode binaries, used by OS/2, Win16 .... and HX's DPMILD16. IIRC it was introduced with MS-DOS v4.0 ("European version").

---
MS-DOS forever!

Yes it works, behold the MS Windows 3.0 on hp IPAQ214
http://rayer.ic.cz/350d/ipaqwin3.jpg

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

> NE isn't a Windows invention. It's the file format for 16-bit
> protected-mode binaries, used by OS/2, Win16 .... and HX's DPMILD16. IIRC
> it was introduced with MS-DOS v4.0 ("European version").

Even earlier indeed: It is discussed in the 1988 edition of "MS-DOS Encyclopedia" , but do you (or anyone else) know of any NE executable that runs under plain DOS ?

> > NE isn't a Windows invention. It's the file format for 16-bit
> > protected-mode binaries, used by OS/2, Win16 .... and HX's DPMILD16.
> IIRC
> > it was introduced with MS-DOS v4.0 ("European version").
>
> Even earlier indeed: It is discussed in the 1988 edition of "MS-DOS
> Encyclopedia" , but do you (or anyone else) know of any NE executable that
> runs under plain DOS ?

I've seen dual mode DOS/Win16 or DOS/OS2 binaries (e.g. some GNUish stuff). Some older MS DOS tools (Fortran???) also produced bound .EXEs that ran either with native OS/2 or real-mode OS/2 API emulation in pure MS-DOS.

What Japheth's apparently referring to (from a quick search) seems to be background processes for the (very) short-lived MS-DOS 4.0 European (not related to normal MS-DOS 4), which had to be in NE format. I think it was all real mode, though, and brief attempts at MS trying to add 286 support didn't work well. And with Win 3.0 coming around the corner with the 386's V86 mode, I guess they stopped caring since that worked better at multitasking DOS stuff anyways.