DOS Versions

[Roady]

Hi

I have many questions on DOS as I have never been an expert on it!

1. What versions of DOS runs in XP Prof. and Vista Ultimate when you open a DOS window? How can I find this out?.

2. Do you really need to install DOS as well as a O/S? Can you just use the Windows O/S DOS to do everything you need to in DOS?

3. What advantages are there here?

4. Is it best to use DOS on a boot disk?

5. What would you use DOS for? examples please!!!

Thanks to all that help me unserstand and reply.

[Roady]

Ok I take it I found the version!!

[awaj]

That would be Comand prompt. Some people here may say, go to comand prompt (start run, type "CMD" and hit enter.) I've only used it to do networking, but I've only scratched the surfice of what it is capable of doing. It is not DOS though, and if you try using it to play some DOS games, it can, and probably will mess up your system. I don't know about other applications though.

What do you want to do? There are DOS emulators that may do what you want them to do. You can also dual boot to DOS.

[Paul Komski]

awaj is on the money. A command prompt is not DOS. Many operating systems can operate at a command line level as well as a GUI (Graphical User Interface) level. This includes DOS and Windows (both the DOS-based and the NT-based Versions) and Linux. The GUI's available in DOS applications tend to use an ncurses interface and are rather rudimentary in comparison to full Windows type applications.

DOS is not a plug-n-play OS and relies on the BIOS for how it integrates with hardware. This can be both an advantage and a disadvantage in particular in certain troubleshooting areas.

DOS runs off a small footprint and so will run on very old hardware.

Certain games sparkle when run from DOS and even other software (I know of certain economic modelling programs) run extremely well under DOS but have not been successfully ported to a Windows platform.

There are different versions of DOS including FreeDOS, CalderaDOS and MS-DOS and they all come in different version numbers as well. Some only functioning with say FAT16 systems - other having long file name support and such like and capable of working with FAT32 systems and larger storage capacities. Etc, etc.

The "simplicity" and the absence of any registry (or equivalent stored parameters) in DOS are some of its great strengths.

It probably has little place with most modern computer geeks but a knowledge of it for understanding the history of computer development and for specialist tasks is IMHO mandatory.

Using a command line may also seem outmoded - for a modern operating system - but one of the great advantages is that command lines are much more easily integrated into programs and are hence of great value for programmers - who else.

[Rick]

Programs that use dos.

Bios update programs
Old dos program
Dos games ( on a few modern systems you have to run a slow down program)
Some memory test programs
Some hard drive test programs

[Roady]

Ok well thanks for that insight to DOs.

Away.
I was not trying to do anything in particular I was just curious, but reading the other posts in here I dont think I really need to care about DOS anymore!!

If i was to use older gaming then maybe as I remember having to tell game which IRQ etc etc to use for various pieces of hardware. Them were the days!! or were they.

[awaj]

If you want to play games, DOSBOX does a fantastic job. there are still a few bugs with it, but all the games I've played work almost perfectly (excluding the fact that it crashes usually when I switch to full screen mode)

[Sylvander]

USEFUL STUFF [on (DOS?) floppy]

1. Smart Boot Manager = SBM (http://paulski.com/zpages.php?id=1612).

2. Image for DOS = IforD (http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/downloads-image-for-dos.htm).

3. BootIT NG = BiNG (http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/downloads-bootit-next-generation.htm).

4. KillDisk (http://www.killdisk.com/downloadfree.htm).

5. A nice bootable DOS floppy I made holding ptedit+partinfo+edit.com+DOSprompt+info.txt (http://www.pcguide.com/vb/showthread.php?t=52472)

6. Files to make DOS bootable floppy that accesses USB devices
http://www.erniek.eclipse.co.uk/downloads/usb4dos.zip

7. Use MS-DOS 7.10s Bootdisk link from HERE (http://oldfiles.org.uk/powerload/bootdisk.htm) to make DOS 7.10 bootable floppy.

8. Get MBRlister from HERE (http://home.online.no/~paulsen8/MBRlister.zip).

9. NTFS Reader for DOS from HERE (www.ntfs.com/products.htm).

10. PTS Disk Editor using PTSDE104.ZIP (http://www.geocities.com/thestarman3/tool/dl/PTSDE104.ZIP) got from HERE (http://www.softpanorama.org/Windows/filesystems_recovery.shtml).

11. CopyWipe (http://www.bootitng.com/copywipe.php).

12. Bob Cerelli's Win98SE or WinME Boot Floppies (http://www.onecomputerguy.com/install/floppies.htm#boot_floppy).

13. Seatools Desktop HDD Diagnostic Program. (http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/support/downloads/seatools/)

14. #1-TuffTest-Lite FREE bootable Hardware Diagnostic floppy (http://www.tufftest.com/free.htm).

15. MEMtest96 RAM testing program on bootable floppy (http://www.memtest.org/).

16. Darik's Boot and Nuke (http://dban.sourceforge.net/).

17. MBRtool (http://www.diydatarecovery.nl/mbrtool.htm) & MBRwork (http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/downloads-free-software.htm).

18. Avira NTFS4DOS Personal FREE (http://www.free-av.com/en/tools/11/avira_ntfs4dos_personal.html).

[Paul Komski]

Sorry to be pedantic but SBM is not a DOS application. It is a proprietary formatted floppy with not even any FAT tables and no files anywhere nor a root directory. Neither is BiNG. BiNG is however FAT formatted but there are no basic dos files such as IO.SYS, COMMAND.COM AND MSDOS.SYS

[Sylvander]

I never said SBM or BiNG were or were not on bootable DOS floppies.

What I said right at the top of the list as a heading was:
"USEFUL STUFF [on (DOS?) floppy]"

I was saying that this was useful stuff, each on a floppy, which may or may not have been DOS.
That's the reason I put the question mark after the DOS inside the brackets.
Because most were, but some were not [tufftest for example].
I was trying my best to list them all but still be correct.

Perhaps you think I was unaware, and you are just trying to keep me up to speed?
In which case, thanks. :)

[Paul Komski]

I saw the ? and my pedantry wasn't directed at you but to clarify about DOS to the OP and other peeps since this was the essence of this thread.

[Sylvander]

Ah...right. :)

[Ajmukon]

... i use DOSbox to run older applications if i need to.

its buggy, but it works 90% of the time

[FrankSG]

DOS stands for Disk Operating System. Windows is an operating system. With DOS (the old operating system), you had to type in certain commands to accomplish a task. With Windows you don't have to know or understand the commands. You just look at the (pictures) or the text and click away with your mouse. Most of the commands that were in DOS are now in Windows and are usually in the System or System32 folder. When you use your mouse and point and click on what you want to accomplish it is carried out.

[awaj]

Knowing DOS, and a couple other languages, you can do a bit more then the average person though.

[mjc]

DOS stands for Disk Operating System. Windows is an operating system.

That is very true now...but up until Windows XP (on the consumer side and NT on the 'business' side) Windows was just an overlay GUI (Graphical User Interface) for DOS...in other words it was DOS with eye candy.

[Paul Komski]

Knowing DOS, and a couple other languages
DOS is not a language - it is an operating system.

With DOS (the old operating system), you had to type in certain commands to accomplish a task.
If you were at a command prompt you could type in commands. DOS programs with their own rudimentary GUIs or elaborate graphics could also be programmed to start automatically - usually via config.sys and autoexec.bat - without the user ever having to type any commands.

Just because commands are issued textually or from some sort of graphic is not a distinguishing feature of DOS or the increasingly less and less DOS-based versions of Windows up to Windows ME. Nor is it any more the case for Linux which can be run from graphics or from a command line.

Windows (as a GUI based OS) with its Desktop and "Windows" and Icons was in part precipitated or hurried into being by what Apple/Mac had done with their user interface.

If one wants to compare Operating Systems one needs to ask the question about what the essence of an operating system is. That essence has to do with how the kernel integrates with the hardware and any software (usually loaded from a Disk nowadays) and not on what the user interface looks like.

[FrankSG]

Knowing DOS, and a couple other languages, you can do a bit more then the average person though.
I certainly agree with that! If a person first learned on DOS, it gives him/her a better understanding of what is going on. I still, occasionally, get to a DOS prompt and do some things. What used to work still will work. As an example, in Windows, if you want to copy a file to a different place, you select what you want to copy and click copy and then go to where you want to put it and click paste. To do the same thing with a DOS prompt, one way to do it is to go to the folder (which used to be called directory), select the file you want copied and type copy (and the name of the file you want copied). Then to to the folder where you want it copied and type paste. So most of the commands that you once use in DOS, (copy, paste, del, etc.) will still work. You can even still create a batch file and run it through a DOS prompt. But most of the old DOS programs probably will not work. There may be a few that will--I'm not sure--but most of them will not.

[Paul Komski]

But most of the old DOS programs probably will not work. There may be a few that will--I'm not sure--but most of them will notIt's surprising just how many compiled executables made for DOS will run under versions of windows up to WinXP - even without invoking any compatibility modes. I think, for example, that early versions of WordPerfect (and the first floppy installations of Office) are OK under many Windows versions. DOS-type scripts such as batch files tend to work fine under the DOS-based windows but fork or diverge somewhat under the NT-based windows (the command set under NT and DOS not being identical).

PS
Amazing - WordPerfect for DOS can run more or less normally under Windows Vista (http://www.columbia.edu/~em36/wpdos/)

[FrankSG]

It's surprising just how many compiled executables made for DOS will run under versions of windows up to WinXP - even without invoking any compatibility modes.
For anyone who has not learned DOS, I think it would be a good idea to learn it anyway. It will help them to have a better understanding of everything and maybe help them to solve some problems. I'm sure that there are plenty of free tutorials that can be downloaded. I think if one uses a computer, he ought to know DOS. Just my opinion, but I would encourage anyone who doesn't know it to download a tutorial and learn it.

[awaj]

Just note, because you can do more in the CMD prompt, get a good understanding for how things work, before doing too much with CMD.

[FrankSG]

Just note, because you can do more in the CMD prompt, get a good understanding for how things work, before doing too much with CMD.

That's correct, If you are not too familiar with it, you can make some problems for yourself. I would suggest to make too folders--name them anything you want, test2 for one, test3 for the other or whatever you want. You can even name them after your spouse. I'm not sure but if you name the folder or file with more that 8 characters, you may get a message that says something like, "too many characters" or "incorrect parameter" since DOS would recognize no more that 8 characters. However, if you get this message, simply put quotation marks around the name if the folder. Then Copy some files to each of these folders and do some work with them such as, copy, paste, add attributes, remove attributes, make and run some batch files. rename some files and many other things. But, be sure you are in those folders when doing these things. If you delete some files thinking your are in one of your test folders and your are in a different one, you could deleted some important files. I can't see how you can do any damage if you work only it the two test folders. Maybe an over statement, but I think learning DOS is the foundation for learning the ins and outs of a computer.

[Paul Komski]

The one thing I couldn't agree more with is that people can benefit greatly from a good grasp of file management - regardless of the OS and regardless of the interface. It is sadly lacking in very many computer users as is the ability or will to make backups (even simple copy backups) of their special stuff.

I can't think of any good reason to learn the very wide range of MS-DOS commands (http://cis.uniroma2.it/pedersen/batutil/help/INDEX.HTM) any more than the very wide range of Linux ones (http://www.onlamp.com/linux/cmd/). Knowing where to find the list is however of real value.

There are four things about using the DOS-prompt that I wish I had learned long before I actually did.

That entering /? after a command nearly always gives you help or a list of options.
That using the Up and Down arrows will scroll through your previously entered commands.
That, from within a Windows command console, one can copy areas of the output to clipboard (eg mark and hit enter).
That one can output to a new text file by sufficing > <path to file> or add to a text file with the suffix >> <path to file> after the command.