«

[Grinder]

This is supposed to be a list of what we want to see there. To all of you who are not involved with the guide, please post what you would expect from our guide to building the ultimate dos pc. I will establish a list made up of several to-dos (including those who are willing to take care of them), and will later on cross the done ones out. Now let's hear those suggestions!



Also, here are some things I want to work on:

• A list of small tools (we can put links to the tools there and explain their purpose)
• More on the Dual-Boot thing
• More on DSL
• Useful applications
• CD-ROM support
• FreeDOS Setup
• Stuff about memory

[Mighty Midget]

You mention Win 3.0. Now, I'm not certain about this, but I think Win 3.0 was more of a GUI shell for DOS than an operating system in it's own right. If so, then Win 3.0 could be considered a tool on/for the DOS machine, in other words a (useful?) DOS application.

[win98]

Nice ideas Henning. I can find out some of the useful tools for you and get them.

[crazedloon]

If I can find them, I have my own notes somewhere about FreeDOS. FreeDOS is pretty short on documentation and support, and I think my notes would be useful to anyone thinking about building a DOS-based gaming system.

EDIT: OK I found my notes but they're too long to paste on the forum, so download here:

Notes.txt

These are the install notes (some copied verbatim from the installer program, some paraphrased) for all the optional packages bundled with FreeDOS 1.0 except for the 10 or so games. There may be some spelling errors. I took these notes so that I could keep track of what I was doing when trying stuff out (e.g. replacing FreeDOS command.com with alternatives). Newbies to DOS would definitely find it useful to print that out, and experienced DOS hands would find it equally useful as a reference for some of the programs they might have installed on their FreeDOS system.

[Grinder]

Mighty Midget: Win 3.0 is indeed more like a shell, but definitely not useful. That's why we chose not to go into detail, but I'll go about correcting that info.
crazedloon: Thanks, I think I'll incorporate that. Good job.

[The Fifth Horseman]

Technically, Windows 9x family was not operating systems by themselves but rather GUI shells for MS-DOS.

[Icewolf]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(the_fifth_horseman @ Jan 17 2007, 10:57 AM) [snapback]275278[/snapback]</div>

Technically, Windows 9x family was not operating systems by themselves but rather GUI shells for MS-DOS.[/b]

Whoa! :blink:

Win2K and XP are?

[The Fifth Horseman]

No, these are from the NT family which was non-DOS-based from the getgo.
Also, from W95 onwards, things changed a bit... so DOS was effectively only kicking the whole thing into the gear.
Win 3.x's are nothing more then GUI shells.

[gregor]

What about CD drivers and install of CD drive? Might be handy.

Also it is possible to get different settings when you start up dos. i have this disk and when i start dos with that disk it asks me which memory type i want and then it installs the type i need (EMS or XMS) depending on my need,

[Icewolf]

I have a general setiing whoch makes every CD-drive work with DOS.

Who is to be PM'ed?