Page 1 of 2

Who o' you has DOS?

Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2002 5:34 am
by 486 player
In all my command line helps, I pressume, that you've DOS and
path c:\dos
or
path c:\windows\command
in autoexec.bat.

Mine's 6.22. I wanna know, so I wouldn't post a needless answer.

Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2002 2:15 pm
by Kazer0
I have dos 6.2 with a 6.22 upgrade, with win 3.1. Nothing works in it tho, cuz i have to boot with a floppy cuz it says "MISSING OPERATING SYSTEM" and i formatted it and installed dos like 8 times.

DOS 7.1

Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2002 4:28 pm
by procerus
I use DOS every day. Windows 9x/ME is a DOS-based GUI. DOS loads when the OS boots and then the GUI loads on top. Microsoft had their reasons to pretend otherwise but anyone with any sense watching Windows 9x/ME boot could see the truth.

I use the Windows 9x/ME GUI (suitably streamlined with 98lite) as a launcher to run full DOS mode environments and games. Here are my current memory environments (all with mouse, CD-ROM, sound and VESA refresh rate utility loaded and with the XMS environments a disk cache too)-

Image

DOS is DOS. But for all that, the version of DOS that Windows 9x/ME is based on was further developed from 6.22. To quote the infernal Microsoft-

"In many ways MS-DOS 7.x is superior to earlier MS-DOS
versions, and has extra features. Most notable is probably
the Return-code shell, invoked with:
command /z /k
In this shell, ERRORLEVEL changes are displayed on
screen, including intermediate ERRORLEVEL changes
during pipe operations, which are not otherwise easy
to view. Very useful for documenting and studying the
ERRORLEVELs of commands.

MS-DOS 7 also allows the expansion of environment
variables in immediate mode (=when typed at the prompt)
and allows environment variables to be write-protected
(by setting them with lowercase names).

Also useful is the addition of the START command,
which enables ERRORLEVELs to be returned from
GUI processes (this needs the START /w switch).

There are also improvements to XCOPY, better "string"
handling and better operation of the FOR IN DO statement.

MS-DOS 7 also permits immediate mode command lines
up to 255 characters and internal (process-to-process)
command lines up to 1024 characters. See command.com /?
help for details of this feature."

I'm a gamer and I (slowly) follow the necessary technology. So I'll be forced to use XP at some point when DirectX no longer runs on Windows 9x/ME. For all that I'm loathe to give up on Windows 9x/ME. At the very least I hope to be dual booting for the forseeable future. Windows 9x/ME is DOS. And, once you lose the clumsy GUI and get out to full DOS mode, it's quite a capable version. B)

Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2002 9:39 pm
by John The Ax
I have WinXP, so I have no DOS. :shame: I'm sorry. It's (not really) my fault. But, I can get many games to work. So that's good.

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:23 am
by 486 player
1. Boot with boot disc.
2. Change to DOS installation disk 1. (May be also patch one.)
3. Type sys c:
4. Boot

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:45 am
by John The Ax
So you're saying I can install DOS?

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2002 11:04 am
by 486 player
Only if hard disk's formated by format.com first. (Is in installition disk.)

DON'T DO IT!!!!!

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:43 pm
by Kazer0
I think that all windows come with integrated dos software. I know that 95, and 98 do. The games should run through the Dos prompt anyways. I don't like xp anyways. The best would be Windows ME with the Windows XP Logon Screen.

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2002 2:49 am
by Da_Goat
98SE (or, lite, I guess......I've never tried "lite".....) is better than ME, in my opinion. But, yeah, XP has a pretty cool interface.

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2002 12:27 pm
by Kazer0
Im running 98se, i despise it! Is it supposed to be newer than ME? It costs more...

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2002 6:18 pm
by Da_Goat
I'm not sure......I just know that I like it better.

Windows 98SE

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2002 11:55 am
by procerus
Windows ME is newer than 98SE. But, although I don't like silly arguements going on about one operating system being "better" than another (it's all a matter of taste and personal preference), I'm not too keen on ME because it won't let you get to full DOS mode. Which is a bit cheeky for a GUI that's plainly, like all the Win9xs, balanced on top of a version of DOS.

Windows 98SE is a pretty useful OS even if it does lack the security and stability that's possible with a well set up and configured version of Windows NT/2000/XP. You see, the whole trick with these operating systems is knowing how to set them up!

I was on the beta for Windows 95. It took me years but I learned how to set up Windows 9x so that it's quick, clean, versatile and stable. The main trick is to scrap the Active Desktop. That increases stability by about 95%. 98lite's cool too. And here's a guy who knows what he's talking about-
http://dq.com/resources/win98tip.html

It may seem a lot of trouble to go to. But it all becomes second nature. And if you do an install like this it should last for at least two years because you keep it clean and stable by doing proper maintenance. Vital processes and checks are-

1/ Always back up the registry before trying any new software (no Add/Remove ever works properly so, if you don't like the software, uninstall it and restore the registry copy).

2/ Always use CleanSweep or similar when you install anything after the original OS install. Then, after you've done a program's normal Add/Remove, remove it again with CleanSweep (and be amazed at all the crud it left).

3/ Clean the registry regularly. Microsoft's own RegClean works okay (but it needs a special file to fix game controllers under DirectX 8 after it's run). RegCleaner is a good tool too. But once again, CleanSweep probably does the best job. I use all three!

4/ Run the System File Checker often. Run it when you first do the install. And keep running it. If any program changes a file for an older version (and installing stuff does this all the time) restore the later one. If the program complains then copy its version into its folder. Then it uses the old one and the rest of your system uses the up-to-date one.

Obviously ScanDisk and Defrag are important and I have two up-to-date virus scanners. But only run them on demand. Never have them running all the time, particularly on a gaming machine. They use too many resources. Configure your download manager to use them to scan incoming files and then quit. Just scan stuff that's new to the system.

If you're really paranoid, like me, then run AdAware sometimes. And set up ZoneAlarm so that it's only running when you're connected to the Internet and quit it when you quit.

Make sure that there's no unknown stuff running in the background on the system. Programmer's are such arrogant SOBs. Remove shortcuts from StartUp on the Start Menu. And remove items loading from the registry. If you're a beginner it's probably best to use a tool like StartUpCpl (Start Up Control Panel) from here-
http://www.mlin.net/

Other stuff's more cosmetic. I mean I never can understand why people don't spend a little time organising their Start Menus. When I put my mouse over "Programs" the menu appears with four items next to it- "Applications, Comms, Games, System Tools". Each of these logically branch in turn. It saves me hours of browsing the menu looking for stuff. I can just go and click it.

I could go on. And on. As you've probably gathered I'm a fast touch-typist. I can go on and on for pages like this.

Oh no :rolleyes: nobody's read this far anyway. :laugh:

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2002 3:30 pm
by Kazer0
I read it all, so your wrong. I dont like the 98se, its bad. and i disagree about gettinbg rid of the shortcuts on your desktop. Its a lot easier tahn going through start menu. :no:

98SE's bad, m'kay?

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2002 3:41 pm
by procerus
:) Ok kazer0! We just have different tastes in these matters. I'll let you use any operating system you want and I promise not to lose any sleep over it :D !

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2002 3:43 pm
by Kazer0
oh ha ha ha... very funny... NOT :blah:


Kazer0

Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2002 5:44 pm
by Da_Goat
BTW, Procerus, not that I'm disagreeing with you but......
although I don't like silly arguements going on about one operating system being "better" than another
I clearly said:
I'm not sure......I just know that I like it better.
Also, you said at some point in the tremedously long post that you don't like icons.........well, that's one thing I like about Win XP. The only manditory icon on your desktop is recycle bin.

Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2002 12:14 pm
by procerus
Da_Goat wrote:
that's one thing I like about Win XP. The only manditory icon on your desktop is recycle bin.
Yes, I like the way that XP can be customized. I look forward to getting a copy (dual booting, of course) next year some time. B)

Not too keen on all this "product activation" stuff though. :(

Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2002 2:10 pm
by Kazer0
I like the tools that came standard with ME. And the look and feel of it. XP is too complicated, everything is in the start menu.

Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2002 6:08 pm
by Da_Goat
um.....You can put everything on your desktop if you want.....but Microsoft had been getting a lot of complaints about all the manditory icons.

Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:23 pm
by Kazer0
I dont mind them. Whats wrong with them?