12 replies to this topic

[Lassar]

With today's 64 bit computers and large hard drives, do you think dos is officially dead as a boot option ?

[sanbarrow]

Officially dead ?



Strange expression - whos gonna judge that ?
DOS is not dead - it just smells funny

[wendy]

DOS is not so much dead, as there are still dusty decks to run antiquated software.

For example, i had to do a y2k fix to a gwbasic program that was written some 20~ ish years before, it was then running under a DOS session under Windows NT 4.

Still, there are systems around that are booting OS's more ancient than DOS, because the apps are no longer supported. I heard of a tripple-layer of emulators (something like running an atari 2600 box inside a win2k box under linux or something) to run apps.

[TheHive]

Emulation is one way to keep it alive.

[Brito]

Well.. DOS as a modern option is getting outdated as fewer software titles are released for this platform and you end up with a huge repository of legacy programs that certainly get outdated as technology moves forward.

But nowadays I find myself learning how to use the command line for linux and it's almost like 1996..

The linux guys use the command line for just about everything and it's almost the same experience as one had when rewinding back to the DOS/Win3.1 era.

If necessary to code something back to the command line, instead of Turbo Pascal 7, I would use freePascal and be able to compile the same program for either DOS or Linux, thought I would probably opt for the later.

I see linux console almost like what DOS should have been in the first place, using tools like apt-get to grab software and allowing to mount different file systems without the use of drive letters.

The only thing I don't really like about linux command line is the need for exact keyword match, DOS made this detail easier for users.

But I also miss those good DOS days when using the mouse was only necessary to play some game and today we expect computers to be online all day long with all sort of gizmos inside (WIFI, Bluetooth, WebCamera, Microfone, SoundCards) and I don't think the average user would bother to waste his time learning to manage all that from the command line when UI solutions are available.

[christensenjohn]

We are using dos to deploy hardware independent images automatic with no user input from pxe. works great and no need to think about injecting sata drivers into dos.

[Lassar]

I like dos myself. Had to convert one of my dos programs to windows using freebasic.

But I was talking about using dos as a boot option.

I think there are very few computers today that dos can even boot from.
(example 64 bit computers and computers with very large hard drives.)

[was_jaclaz]

(example 64 bit computers and computers with very large hard drives.)

OK for x64.

Don't be so sure about large hard disks.

WHICH DOS version?

For 7.x/8.0 there are several tricks.....

....and lzdos...

jaclaz

[mr_]

With today's 64 bit computers and large hard drives, do you think dos is officially dead as a boot option ?

Later MS-DOS versions and FreeDOS have FAT32 support. Most modern IBM-compatible computers are still able to run DOS without problems.

The DOS kernel uses only BIOS services and the motherboard must provide BIOS services because them are needed due to realtime bootstrap phase of modern operating systems such as Windows or Linux.

It's no problem to have some FAT16 or FAT32 partition and to multi boot DOS along with other operating systems. DOS won't be fun on modern operating system when it comes to use legacy applications or legacy games. It's a matter of needed hardware of the legacy application. In DOS days applications preferred to talk directly to the hardware, for example if you want to play DOS games with sound you need to buy a soundcard with DOS support. As soon you have this you can still play DOS games on 64 bit multi core CPU with sound. (Not talking here about CPU to fast and so on.)

[Lassar]

What about 64 bit computers ?

I have not heard of a dos that boots on them.

[Bicephale]

A DOS bootable diskette was the only way for me to
boot 'Slax' installed on an SD card in a USB reader on
a legacy PC (no USB Boot BIOS option). Then i found
out about 'PLoP' which didn't work for SD cards until
very recently so there was no other alternative than
'KExec-Loader'. I combined an old DR-DOS bootable
diskette to 'KExec-Loader' in order to be able to edit
'SysLinux.CFG': there's no configuration editor in the
'KExec-Loader' bootable diskette and failure to boot
'Slax' (or another OS) would mean i was left without
an editor - not to mention that 'Slax' Linux simply ate
my diskette on the 1st attempt to edit and it forced
me to re-create the whole diskette again. In short, i'm
happy with DOS on my multi-boot diskette but i wish
the author had used DOS 8.3 filenaming exclusively...

My intent is to integrate my DOS/'PLoP'/'KExec-Loader'
bootable diskette to the 'Slax' LiveCD to make sure it
can be started from an SD card practically everywhere
it makes sense to lauch 'Slax' in the 1st place.

[was_jaclaz]

What about 64 bit computers ?

I have not heard of a dos that boots on them.

Did you ever try booting a DOS floppy on a 64 bit machine?

jaclaz

[Adam_W]

Maybe his is talking about the systems that are 64-bit only such as the itanium processors made by Intel?

I do not think DOS is really dead in my mind; I still use it quite a bit for specialized programs that the developers have abandoned or have gone out of business. If you are interested in open-source dos based solution take a look at the freedos project which is always coming out with new builds.