12 Oct
2006
12 Oct
'06
12:04 a.m.
I'm not sure if this is old news, but the MSDOS 6.0 code was leaked; a
copy should still be available at
http://www.nurs.or.jp.nyud.net:8080/~nnn/MS-DOS.6.0.Source.Code.zip for
the curious. All x86 assembler, of course.
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
12 Oct
12 Oct
12:38 a.m.
Jim Leonard wrote:
I'm not sure if this is old news, but the MSDOS
6.0 code was leaked; a
copy should still be available at
http://www.nurs.or.jp.nyud.net:8080/~nnn/MS-DOS.6.0.Source.Code.zip for
the curious. All x86 assembler, of course.
Better grab the tools too - linker
asembler ect.
12:14 p.m.
woodelf wrote:
All x86 assembler, of course.
That's interesting - given the evolution of both DOS and the IT industry, I'm
surprised that at least parts weren't written in some other language (e.g. C)
by the time version 6 came out.
Better grab the tools too - linker asembler ect.
Nah, Freedos works just fine for everything I've so far tried it for...
--
If you've ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow
You need buttermilk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw
12:33 p.m.
Jules Richardson wrote:
Alas I got to use Crap-dows for internet and a few
games.
PS. I hindsite why did they not have the time of day clock set to some
rational freq like 30 HZ?
That's interesting - given the evolution of both
DOS and the IT
industry, I'm surprised that at least parts weren't written in some
other language (e.g. C) by the time version 6 came out.
How do we know it was not cross-assembled?
CP/M has a very interesting development history, so DOS may have.
With all the stuff I have seen on the web about old OS's,
source code is not the only thing needed. How it was bootstraped
on the original computer is important too.
Better grab
the tools too - linker asembler ect.
Nah, Freedos works just fine for everything
I've so far tried it for...
2:25 p.m.
woodelf wrote:
How do we know it was not cross-assembled?
A quick poke at the code shows stuff in the .asm like "invoke (routine)"
so there must have been something going on. I'm not familiar with
"invoke", rather CALL and the like.
PS. I hindsite why did they not have the time of day
clock set to some
rational freq like 30 HZ?
Probably because they were trying to get it all the way down to 1Hz (so
that only full-second resolution were available) and were stopped by the
16-bit value of the divider which only allows going down to 18.2Hz... Or
maybe instead they thought "the less interrupts firing, the more CPU
time left over for apps" and just made it as slow as it could go. No
idea, really...
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
2:32 p.m.
Jim Leonard wrote:
woodelf wrote:
BTW, check out some of these comments:
http://digg.com/security/MS_DOS_6_0_appears_to_be_on_Google_Code_Search
My favorite source code comments, pardon the french:
; fuckin' sixteen-bit machine ought
; to be able to handle a SIXTEEN-BIT
; DISPLACEMENT!!
With the runner-up:
; BIOS is fucking with us - give up
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
How do we know it was not cross-assembled?
A quick poke at the code shows stuff in the .asm like "invoke (routine)"
so there must have been something going on. I'm not familiar with
"invoke", rather CALL and the like. 
2:35 p.m.
And thusly were the wise words spake by Jim Leonard
woodelf wrote:
Don't you mean PEEK? ;)
How do we know it was not cross-assembled?
A quick poke at the code shows stuff in the .asm like "invoke (routine)"
so there must have been something going on. I'm
not familiar with
"invoke", rather CALL and the like.
Cheers,
Bryan
P.S. And don't worry, I'll be here all week...
3:34 p.m.
woodelf wrote:
PS. I hindsite why did they not have the time of day
clock set to some
rational freq like 30 HZ?
The interrupt rate was set in the BIOS, probably before PC-DOS was even
envisioned. So why 55 msec? Easy--
The clock frequency is derived from the 4.77 MHz system clock and is
1.19318 MHz, derived from the 4.77 MHz processor clock. The largest
interrupt interval allowed by the 8253 CTC is 65536 counts, which gives you
18.2 times per second.
This was a wise move--handling a periodic interrupt to keep the clock
updated (and also to figure out when to turn diskette drive motors off) is
expensive on slower processors. And, the faster the clock, the tighter the
constraints on OS code to not disable interrupts for excessive periods.
Given the speed of the original 5150, a 55 msec timer interval was pretty
reasonable.
Coicidentally, there are quite nearly 2**16 of these interrupts in an hour.
It's instructive to compare the original 5150 BIOS code listing with the
dreck present in MS-DOS. The BIOS is carefully documented, and enjoys a
certain amount of convention. So, if you're within a procedure at label
C12, you know that label C13 will probably be the next label in the
listing. The BIOS was probably written by a mainframe programmer who had
learned to deal with design review meetings, large multi-coder projects and
code review.
As a curious aside, the trimmer near the 14 MHz crystal on the 5150 is
intended not to adjust the time-of-day clock accuracy, but rather to adjust
color rendition with the CGA card.
Cheers,
Chuck
4:40 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
woodelf wrote:
The clock frequency is derived from the 4.77 MHz
system clock and is
1.19318 MHz, derived from the 4.77 MHz processor clock. The largest
interrupt interval allowed by the 8253 CTC is 65536 counts, which gives you
18.2 times per second.
Well 20 Hz is better than 18.2. :(
4:48 p.m.
woodelf wrote:
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Not really. Anything that *uses* those timebases would
let the compiler figure out how many IRQ's, clock cycles,
"whatever" are needed for a specific interval. It's not
wise to write code *assuming* you'll be able to do something
"simple" to get a "nice number" (e.g., 16Hz would encourage
folks to think they could just use a few shifts to get "seconds"
woodelf wrote:
The clock frequency is derived from the 4.77 MHz
system clock and is
1.19318 MHz, derived from the 4.77 MHz processor clock. The largest
interrupt interval allowed by the 8253 CTC is 65536 counts, which
gives you
18.2 times per second.
Well 20 Hz is better than 18.2. :( from "IRQ's", etc.)
And, in some environments (*not* desktops) the jiffy IRQ may not
be "periodic" (but that's another issue :> )
4:55 p.m.
On 10/12/2006 at 2:40 PM woodelf wrote:
Well 20 Hz is better than 18.2. :(
For the kind of things that PC-DOS 1.0 did, 1 Hz would have probably been
just fine.
At any rate, there's nothing to prevent you from increasing the interrupt
frequency and dividing down to 18.2 Hz using software and issuing int 0x1c
yourself. Many packages did this under DOS when a finer timer resolution
was needed.
--Chuck
7:36 p.m.
As a curious aside, the trimmer near the 14 MHz
crystal on the 5150 is
intended not to adjust the time-of-day clock accuracy, but rather to adjust
color rendition with the CGA card.
But only if you're using a composite NTSC monitor (the colour subcarrier
-- 3.58-ish MHz -- is 1/4 of the master clock freqwuncy, of course). On
a TTL RGB monitor, like the 5153, the trimemr does nothing.
-tony
8:21 p.m.
On 10/13/2006 at 12:36 AM ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk wrote:
But only if you're using a composite NTSC monitor
(the colour subcarrier
-- 3.58-ish MHz -- is 1/4 of the master clock freqwuncy, of course). On
a TTL RGB monitor, like the 5153, the trimemr does nothing.
Just relating what the notation is on the 5150 schematic. Most folks think
it's meant for correcting the time-of-day clock.
Cheers,
Chuck
13 Oct
13 Oct
5:36 p.m.
On 10/13/2006 at 12:36 AM ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk wrote:
If you've got the scheamtics, it's obvious that the trimmer just 'pulls'
the crystal frequency a bit. And the CGA card scheamatics show how that
master clock is used to generate the NTSC colour subcarrier.
The TTL RGB monitors just take the 4 digital signals from the CGA card,
such a monitor doesn't use the NTSC encoder circuit. So it's clear the
clock freqeuncy doesn't alter the colour on said monitor.
IIRC, tweaking this trimmer is documetned in the Hardware Maintenance and
Service manuals, as a way to correct missing colour on a composite monitor.
-tony
But only if you're using a composite NTSC
monitor (the colour subcarrier
-- 3.58-ish MHz -- is 1/4 of the master clock freqwuncy, of course). On
a TTL RGB monitor, like the 5153, the trimemr does nothing.
Just relating what the notation is on the 5150 schematic. Most folks think
it's meant for correcting the time-of-day clock.
6:19 p.m.
On 10/13/2006 at 10:36 PM ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk wrote:
IIRC, tweaking this trimmer is documetned in the
Hardware Maintenance and
Service manuals, as a way to correct missing colour on a composite
monitor.
Probably. I think the 14.3/4.77 MHz clock and cassette tape interface go a
long way toward explaining the original intent of the 5150--basically a
home entertainment box driving a TV set, much like the Atari 400/800
boxes. And it also explains that when I tried to order a 5150 for export
(50Hz 220v), the IBM sales office told me that it "would be a while yet".
Given price point of the PC, it would have been a very difficult sell
against the Atari and CBM machines had IBM not changed its marketing focus
a bit.
Given the (somewhat needless) complexity of the MDA. I get the feeling that
it was an afterthought type of product to turn the PC into a desktop
computer.
So IBM just "stumbled" into the desktop market, it seems. If they were
truly aiming for it from the start, their box might have been an 8 MHz
8086.
Cheers,
Chuck
9:43 a.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
That's interesting, though. IBM must have believed that the 5150 would be a
global product and I'd expect that was the plan all along - so why put
circuitry on there for one market only?
As a curious
aside, the trimmer near the 14 MHz crystal on the 5150 is
intended not to adjust the time-of-day clock accuracy, but rather to adjust
color rendition with the CGA card.
But only if you're using a composite NTSC monitor (the colour subcarrier
-- 3.58-ish MHz -- is 1/4 of the master clock freqwuncy, of course). On
a TTL RGB monitor, like the 5153, the trimemr does nothing. 
9:19 a.m.
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:43:42 +0000, Jules Richardson wrote:
That's interesting, though. IBM must have believed
that the 5150 would be a
global product and I'd expect that was the plan all along - so why put
circuitry on there for one market only?
I do not think there was ever was a PAL version of the CGA card.
As far as I know the CGA card was the only one dependant on the base clock freq being
right on.
or It would loose color burst. I always thought the 4.77mhz was chosen because it could
also be used as the
clock ref for the video.
THe other Bob
5:22 p.m.
Bob wrote:
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:43:42 +0000, Jules Richardson
wrote:
Correct.
That's interesting, though. IBM must have
believed that the 5150 would be a
global product and I'd expect that was the plan all along - so why put
circuitry on there for one market only?
I do not think there was ever was a PAL version of the CGA card. As far as I know the CGA card was the only one
dependant on the base clock freq being right on.
or It would loose color burst. I always thought the 4.77mhz was chosen because it could
also be used as the
clock ref for the video.
Yep. The fact that it and the CPU are driven at integral divisions of
the timer rate is further proof.
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
6 p.m.
New subject: NTSC vs PAL onboard. was Re: MSDOS Source code leaked
Quoting Jim Leonard <trixter at oldskool.org>:
Bob wrote:
It wasn't really a problem, you bought a complete system with monitor. It was
no different from buying a system with TTL, Hercules, EGA, PGA, or later VGA
monitors. For the very few applications where we need to connect to a TV or
video recorder etc we'd just have to get a PAL card with composit output or NTSC
to PAL conversion hardware.
Reminds me of the AppleII, I once bought a Euro-Apple motherboard from a surplus
place (late 70's I think), it had PAL onboard instead of NTSC (never released to
the market I believe). Trouble was lots of add-on cards wouldn't work with it
(from memory 80column video, CP/M and Flex add-ons) ... so I sat down with the
schematics (supplied) and compared them with those published in the AppleII
manual (yes every manual had the schematics in a foldout inside the back cover)
and hacked the motherboard back to a standard AppleII.
It worked ;-)
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:43:42 +0000, Jules
Richardson wrote:
Correct. That's interesting, though. IBM must have
believed that the 5150
would be a global product and I'd expect that was the plan all along
- so why put circuitry on there for one market only?
I do not think there was ever was a PAL version of the CGA card.
5:45 p.m.
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:43:42 +0000, Jules Richardson wrote:
There wasn't. In fact I've never seen a PAL version of any classic
IBM-compatible video card.
It was possible to reprogram the 6845 registers on a CGA card to give
European TV timing, albeit still with NTSC-like colour output on the
composite connector. I have -- somewhere -- a box that plugs into the DE9
(TTL RGV output) connector on a CGA card and which encodes said signals
to PAL. The result (after repogramming the 6845) is a PC that can display
on a European TV set.
That's interesting, though. IBM must have
believed that the 5150 would be a
global product and I'd expect that was the plan all along - so why put
circuitry on there for one market only?
I do not think there was ever was a PAL version of the CGA card. As far as I know the CGA card was the only one
dependant on the base clock freq being right on.
A few other cards use the OSC signal from the ISA connector, but AFAIK
none of them depend on the exact frequency like the CGA card does.
or It would loose color burst. I always thought the
4.77mhz was chosen because it could also be used as the
clock ref for the video.
Absolutely. The mater clock is 14,xx MHz. That was chosen becasue it's 4
tiomes the NTSC subcarrier and the division by 4 gives the quadrature
signals needed to make a simple NTSC encoder. The CPU clock is the same
master clock divided by 3 (I have no idea why the Intel clock generator
has a /3 stage in it...)
-tony
8:59 p.m.
Control Systems made an Artist 2 card which was ega like and supported genlock in both
NTSC or PAL
but not both there was a coil and a cap that had to be changed.
It was sold/used for the video overlay of title info on live video.
There was a video titleing system that used it, I forget its name.
I did an Autocad driver for it in about 1985 or 86ish to do video traceing.
Still have a few somewhere in the basement.
The other Bob
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:45:09 +0100 (BST), Tony Duell wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:43:42 +0000, Jules Richardson wrote:
>
> >That's interesting, though. IBM must have believed that the 5150 would be a
> >global product and I'd expect that was the plan all along - so why put
> >circuitry on there for one market only?
>
>
> I do not think there was ever was a PAL version of the CGA card.
There wasn't. In fact I've never seen a PAL
version of any classic
IBM-compatible video card.
It was possible to reprogram the 6845 registers on a
CGA card to give
European TV timing, albeit still with NTSC-like colour output on the
composite connector. I have -- somewhere -- a box that plugs into the DE9
(TTL RGV output) connector on a CGA card and which encodes said signals
to PAL. The result (after repogramming the 6845) is a PC that can display
on a European TV set.
> As far as I know the CGA card was the only one
dependant on the base clock freq being right on.
A few other cards use the OSC signal from the ISA
connector, but AFAIK
none of them depend on the exact frequency like the CGA card does.
> or It would loose color burst. I always thought
the 4.77mhz was chosen because it could also be used as the
> clock ref for the video.
Absolutely. The mater clock is 14,xx MHz. That was
chosen becasue it's 4
tiomes the NTSC subcarrier and the division by 4 gives the quadrature
signals needed to make a simple NTSC encoder. The CPU clock is the same
master clock divided by 3 (I have no idea why the Intel clock generator
has a /3 stage in it...)
-tony
12 Oct
12 Oct
1:23 p.m.
On 10/12/2006 at 4:14 PM Jules Richardson wrote:
That's interesting - given the evolution of both
DOS and the IT industry,
I'm surprised that at least parts weren't written in some other language
(e.g.
C) by the time version 6 came out.
I've probed around in the archive and it looks to be the real thing, based
on some old MS-DOS 2.00 code samples I obtained from Microsoft
directly--you can still see references to things link IBMBIO.COM.
Miserable coding style, by the way--it's amazing that the product could
support its own weight for as long as it did.
Newer utilities are written in C, for what it's worth--which is about what
I'd expect.
An interesting bit of the archie is that it includes the source for
qbasic--something I didn't expect. And the source and documentation (such
as it is) for COW--Microsoft's Character Windows.
From a historical standpoint, it's pretty cool.
Cheers,
Chuck
15 Oct
15 Oct
11:46 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com>
Date: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:30 pm
Subject: Re: MSDOS Source code leaked
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
An interesting bit of the archie is that it includes
the source for
qbasic...
Where did you see that? I found the binary for QBASIC, but I didn't
see the source.
Douglas Wood
12:28 p.m.
On 10/15/2006 at 10:46 AM dbwood at kc.rr.com wrote:
Where did you see that? I found the binary for QBASIC,
but I didn't
see the source.
Take a look at the /45 directory. In particular, note the build
instructions in README.TXT. There's quite a bit of code here and it
appears to include all of the utilities (MASM, CL, etc.) needed to build QB
for various languages. It might be that something's missing, but it looks
pretty complete to me. It's interesting how much code has 1986 as the
origin date.
One of these days, I'll see if the thing will actually build.
Cheers,
Chuck
3:20 p.m.
New subject: DOS answering machine ???
I have a large amount (many hundreds) of old software and got the
following request:
=======================
I am looking for a DOS program to turn my computer into an answering machine.
=================================
Does any body remember the names of DOS programs that might do the job for him?
I know that I had some software that came with a modem that turned it
into an answering machine. Not sure if it was DOS or early Windows.
7:19 p.m.
New subject: DOS answering machine ???
On 10/15/2006 at 3:20 PM Gene Ehrich wrote:
=======================
I am looking for a DOS program to turn my computer into an answering
machine.
=================================
You may find that many DOS modem programs are tied to a given
manufacturer's modem. One I can remember was VoiceConnect for Zyxel
modems. At least one version ran under MS-DOS.
I'll dig around and see if I can find any more. But even Windoze 3.1 will
give you vastly more choices in software.
Cheers,
Chuck
8:56 p.m.
New subject: DOS answering machine ???
On Sunday 15 October 2006 07:19 pm, Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 10/15/2006 at 3:20 PM Gene Ehrich wrote:
Speaking of stuff like that, I have only one modem that I can recall
mentioning such capabilities. And it had a couple of audio jacks on the back
of it in addition to the usual stuff. Weird little unit, a "Maxtech
Netpacer Pro" if I'm remembering right, I couldn't find much on it the last
time I searched.
That was my way to do dialup for a while here until it got weird after a
storm. Now no matter what input you give it on the serial port side it comes
back saying "boot>". My guess on this is that the writable storage in it got
trashed somehow, but other than that I don't know. Suggestions as to how I
might deal with this welcomed, either on or off list.
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, dealiest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of spac, a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
=======================
I am looking for a DOS program to turn my computer into an answering
machine.
=================================
You may find that many DOS modem programs are tied to a given
manufacturer's modem. One I can remember was VoiceConnect for Zyxel
modems. At least one version ran under MS-DOS.
I'll dig around and see if I can find any more. But even Windoze 3.1 will
give you vastly more choices in software.
9:17 p.m.
New subject: DOS answering machine ???
On 10/15/2006 at 8:56 PM Roy J. Tellason wrote:
That was my way to do dialup for a while here until it
got weird after a
storm. Now no matter what input you give it on the serial port side it
comes
back saying "boot>". My guess on this is that the writable storage in it
got
trashed somehow, but other than that I don't know. Suggestions as to how
I
might deal with this welcomed, either on or off list.
Well, you might try running the V.90 upgrade package for the modem (I
assume that you've got a XPVS56E
http://www.maxtech.com/html/fl-modems.html
Dunno if your modem is responsive enough to accept it, but it's a guess.
Cheers,
Chuck
9:32 p.m.
New subject: DOS answering machine ???
On Sunday 15 October 2006 09:17 pm, Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 10/15/2006 at 8:56 PM Roy J. Tellason wrote:
You prompted me to dig into the modems box and pull the unit out -- and you've
nailed the model number exactly, though that number only appears on a paper
sticker and the nameplace actually says "Model SF-1156V/T4" on it.
Too bad the only thing I see there are .exe files. The one for that model
seems to be an LHA self-extracting file, I guess I'll try and see what can
be extracted from it under linux...
That was my way to do dialup for a while here
until it got weird after a
storm. Now no matter what input you give it on the serial port side it
comes back saying "boot>". My guess on this is that the writable storage
in it got trashed somehow, but other than that I don't know. Suggestions
as to how I might deal with this welcomed, either on or off list.
Well, you might try running the V.90 upgrade package for the modem (I
assume that you've got a XPVS56E Dunno if your modem is responsive enough to accept it,
but it's a guess.
Might be worth a shot. Thanks.
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, dealiest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of spac, a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
12 Oct
12 Oct
1:25 p.m.
In article <452DBEBE.3090305 at oldskool.org>,
Jim Leonard <trixter at oldskool.org> writes:
[...] All x86 assembler, of course.
There's a good chunk of C code in there, too. Not everything is in
assembler, although the older parts are and things like the bootstrap
sector are in assembler.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html>
6:46 p.m.
That site seems to be down now
6:50 p.m.
In article <20061012154559.C58076 at shell.lmi.net>,
Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> writes:
That site seems to be down now
I was able to download it just now after reading your mail.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html>
9:32 p.m.
> >
http://www.nurs.or.jp.nyud.net:8080/~nnn/MS-DOS.6.0.Source.Code.zip
> That site seems to be down now
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Richard wrote:
I was able to download it just now after reading your
mail.
IE and Firefox choked on the URL,
but with minor changes, it works.
13 Oct
13 Oct
3:31 p.m.
On Thursday 12 October 2006 09:32 pm, Fred Cisin wrote:
Firefox here (under linux) has no problems with it.
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, dealiest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of spac, a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
> >
http://www.nurs.or.jp.nyud.net:8080/~nnn/MS-DOS.6.0.Source.Code.zip
>
> That site seems to be down now
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Richard wrote:
I was able to download it just now after reading
your mail.
IE and Firefox choked on the URL,
but with minor changes, it works. 
4:27 p.m.
IE and Firefox
choked on the URL,
but with minor changes, it works.
Firefox here (under linux) has no problems with it.
4:37 p.m.
> > IE and Firefox choked on the URL,
http://www.nurs.or.jp.nyud.net:8080/~nnn/MS-DOS.6.0.Source.Code.zip
but with minor changes, it works.
Firefox here
(under linux) has no problems with it.
4:37 p.m.
On 10/13/2006 at 1:27 PM Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Camino on the Mac has no problems either. What were the minor changes?
Grabbed it just fine with Firefox 1.5.0.7 on Win2K.
Cheers,
Chuck
IE and Firefox choked on the URL,
but with minor changes, it works.
Firefox here (under linux) has no problems with it. 
12 Oct
12 Oct
10:08 p.m.
That site
seems to be down now
I was able to download it just now after reading your mail.
11:51 p.m.
Surprisingly.... its still up. I'd figured the gates-goons-quad
would've shut it down within minutes, even something as old as Dos
6.0 You'd figured they'd never allow anything to leak out of their
fortress of solitude.
Anyone watching the progress of reactos.com ??? A Windows XP clone.
Curt
Jim Leonard wrote:
I'm not sure if this is old news, but the MSDOS
6.0 code was leaked; a
copy should still be available at
http://www.nurs.or.jp.nyud.net:8080/~nnn/MS-DOS.6.0.Source.Code.zip
for the curious. All x86 assembler, of course.
13 Oct
13 Oct
9:12 a.m.
And thusly were the wise words spake by Curt @ Atari Museum
Anyone watching the progress of reactos.com ??? A Windows XP clone.
I just tried to, but the webpage seems to be down.. :(
Cheers,
Bryan
9:18 a.m.
Rumor has it that Bryan Pope may have mentioned these words:
And thusly were the wise words spake by Curt @ Atari
Museum
Try www.reactos.org. That one works.
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
zmerch at 30below.com
Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
Anyone watching the progress of reactos.com ??? A Windows XP clone.
I just tried to, but the webpage seems to be down.. :( 
9:38 a.m.
Bryan Pope wrote:
And thusly were the wise words spake by Curt @ Atari
Museum
That's because the URL is wrong. The correct one is <http://www.reactos.org/>
--
Phil. | (\_/) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny
philpem at philpem.me.uk | (='.'=) into your signature to help him gain
http://www.philpem.me.uk/ | (")_(") world domination.
Anyone watching the progress of reactos.com ???
A Windows XP clone.
I just tried to, but the webpage seems to be down.. :(
9:40 a.m.
Curt @ Atari Museum wrote:
Anyone watching the progress of reactos.com ??? A
Windows XP clone.
I did check that out a while ago - I'm a habitual wine user though, which for
my purposes achieves the same goals (plus means I can run windows apps
alongside linux; IIRC reactos is a full bootable OS)
And as I said in another email, freedos/dosemu does a good job of the DOS side
of things under linux - the only annoyance was that it blocks direct access to
the floppy drive hardware (which is hardly surprising, though)
cheers
Jules
12:23 p.m.
On 10/12/2006 at 11:51 PM Curt @ Atari Museum wrote:
Surprisingly.... its still up. I'd figured the
gates-goons-quad
would've shut it down within minutes, even something as old as Dos
6.0 You'd figured they'd never allow anything to leak out of their
fortress of solitude.
So, where's the source for Windows 3.1? :)
Cheers,
Chuck
12:39 p.m.
Rumor has it that Chuck Guzis may have mentioned these words:
On 10/12/2006 at 11:51 PM Curt @ Atari Museum wrote:
Still being used in Windows XP, so it's not ontopic yet... ;-)
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
_??_ zmerch at 30below.com
(?||?) If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
_)(_ disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
Surprisingly.... its still up. I'd figured
the gates-goons-quad
would've shut it down within minutes, even something as old as Dos
6.0 You'd figured they'd never allow anything to leak out of their
fortress of solitude.
So, where's the source for Windows 3.1? :)
12:45 p.m.
And thusly were the wise words spake by Roger Merchberger
Rumor has it that Chuck Guzis may have mentioned these words:
I wonder if anyone has modded (if it is even possible) Windows 3.1
to look like XP? Or the opposite to XP?
Cheers,
Bryan
On 10/12/2006 at 11:51 PM Curt @ Atari Museum
wrote:
Still being used in Windows XP, so it's not ontopic yet... ;-)
Surprisingly.... its still up. I'd figured
the gates-goons-quad
would've shut it down within minutes, even something as old as Dos
6.0 You'd figured they'd never allow anything to leak out of their
fortress of solitude.
So, where's the source for Windows 3.1? :)
1:26 p.m.
I wonder if anyone has modded (if it is even possible)
Windows 3.1
to look like XP? Or the opposite to XP?
Well, there was Calmira that made Win3.1 look like 95 (I have it on my 486
utility laptop). I'm sure the converse has been done, seems like an obvious
kneeslapper hack.
--
--------------------------------- personal: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ ---
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Silence is golden, but duct tape is silver. --------------------------------
1:41 p.m.
On 10/13/2006 at 10:26 AM Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Well, there was Calmira that made Win3.1 look like 95
(I have it on my 486
utility laptop). I'm sure the converse has been done, seems like an
obvious
kneeslapper hack.
In theory, anything's possible, given enough code. Just look at Win32S--or
the bunch of code that supports NT miniport drivers in 98.
Cheers,
Chuck
3:53 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 10/12/2006 at 11:51 PM Curt @ Atari Museum wrote:
there was no source - they just kept on generating big random number sequences
until they got binaries that ran :-)
Surprisingly.... its still up. I'd figured
the gates-goons-quad
would've shut it down within minutes, even something as old as Dos
6.0 You'd figured they'd never allow anything to leak out of their
fortress of solitude.
So, where's the source for Windows 3.1? :)
6494
days inactive
6495
days old
52 comments
21 participants
participants (21)
-
ajwills＠paradise.net.nz -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
bpope＠wordstock.com -
caveguy＠sbcglobal.net -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
curt＠atarimuseum.com -
dave06a＠dunfield.com -
dbwood＠kc.rr.com -
drb＠msu.edu -
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
jwest＠classiccmp.org -
legalize＠xmission.com -
philpem＠philpem.me.uk -
rtellason＠verizon.net -
spectre＠floodgap.com -
THX1138＠dakotacom.net -
trixter＠oldskool.org -
ygehrich＠yahoo.com -
zmerch-cctalk＠30below.com