PDA

View Full Version : Does anyone use MS-DOS 7.1 (stand-alone) CDU version?



nc_mike
June 4th, 2016, 03:48 AM
I noticed that there is a stand-alone version of MS-DOS 7.1 on WinWorld (https://winworldpc.com/product/ms-dos/7x). I am interested in it because I have a PATH that is far too long for earlier versions even when using various tricks and this version, which I believe is usually bundled/integrated with Win95, supports longer PATH statement. Are there any issues using it otherwise? It requires a 386 @15 MHz which isn't a problem for me (I'm running a 486 @33Mhz via an Intel InBoard in my 5160).

Regards,
Mike

Osgeld
June 4th, 2016, 06:25 AM
i have used it, seems to work fine although its a crack n patch job, and yes it support long file names in the ~1 format

Yrouel
June 13th, 2016, 03:29 PM
It's actually my preferred MS-DOS version since it has few nice things like autocompletion that makes it way more enjoyable to use. I tried it from a 386 all the way to a Pentium III and I didn't encounter any issue with it. Win 3.11 also works fine ontop of it.
If you use the floppy images instead of the cd you can merge DISK1 and DISK2 in a single folder (if you don't install from actual floppies) simply moving the DOS71_2S.PAK file into the DISK1 folder and the setup will pick it up automatically.
What I usually do to install it is either prepare a bootable disk (CF card preferably) with the setup folder on it and boot/install directly from that or just put the folder on the disk and then boot from a floppy and then proceed to install it.

Chuck(G)
June 13th, 2016, 04:29 PM
Same here. It's a very good version of DOS that's pretty much free of foibles.

I use DOSLFN for long filename support and HXDOS for Win32 executables.

MCbx
June 13th, 2016, 10:18 PM
Used for a while few years ago. Nice version for newer PCs (I mean 3-486 and later), however some utility programs may not work. I remember some disk checking tool not working properly under this DOS.

nc_mike
June 14th, 2016, 07:16 AM
Used for a while few years ago. Nice version for newer PCs (I mean 3-486 and later), however some utility programs may not work. I remember some disk checking tool not working properly under this DOS.

The 2 disks I had grabbed from WinWorld (a package created in China) had a BAT file but no setup executable, were not bootable, and didn't have any format utiliity. It looks like some sort of raw Win95 extraction Maybe I just need to find a better package.

Regards,
Mike

Agent Orange
June 14th, 2016, 07:49 AM
The 2 disks I had grabbed from WinWorld (a package created in China) had a BAT file but no setup executable, were not bootable, and didn't have any format utiliity. It looks like some sort of raw Win95 extraction Maybe I just need to find a better package.

Regards,
Mike

What I've done in the past, if you have the hardware resources available, is to make a WIN98-SE startup floppy, and simply copy out the contents of A:\ directory and then the RAM drive created by the install routine. You're not going to get everything, but enough to get you started. Here's a good place to start:

http://www.allbootdisks.com/disk_contents/98.html

Stone
June 14th, 2016, 08:05 AM
The 2 disks I had grabbed from WinWorld (a package created in China) had a BAT file but no setup executable, were not bootable, and didn't have any format utiliity. It looks like some sort of raw Win95 extraction Maybe I just need to find a better package.Nah, you just need to be a little more creative...

My running version of DOS 7.xx is one I cobbled together from a WIN98SE boot disk. I added emm386.exe, mscdex.exe, debug.exe, doskey.com edit.com, format,com, scandisk.com, mem.exe diskcopy.com chkdsk.exe and xcopy.exe, mainly from WIN98, and DOS 6.22, a few Batch files linked to dosver (to allow the DOS 6.22 utilities to run)... and there you have it. :-)

Chuck(G)
June 14th, 2016, 08:30 AM
I install from with Win9x CD and modify the MSDOS.SYS file to say "BootGUI=0". That way, I have Windows if I really need it.

You can generate boot floppies the usual way as well.

frax
June 18th, 2016, 10:29 AM
Doesn't NDOS and 4Dos both support PATH's longer then 255 chars?

krebizfan
June 18th, 2016, 10:45 AM
4DOS lists the maximum PATH length as 500 characters.

nc_mike
June 18th, 2016, 12:30 PM
It sounds like since I already have PC DOS 2000 and don't need FAT32 support, installing 4DOS 8.0 to replace COMMAND.COM would appear to be the easiest, most compatible way to get extended PATH support. Later I am sure I can make use of all of the extended batch capability 4DOS offers.

I'll give it a whirl.

Thanks.
Mike

Agent Orange
June 18th, 2016, 01:03 PM
It sounds like since I already have PC DOS 2000 and don't need FAT32 support, installing 4DOS 8.0 to replace COMMAND.COM would appear to be the easiest, most compatible way to get extended PATH support. Later I am sure I can make use of all of the extended batch capability 4DOS offers.

I'll give it a whirl.



Thanks.
Mike

Just curious. Why such a long path?

nc_mike
June 18th, 2016, 01:48 PM
Just curious. Why such a long path?

I know a lot of folks enjoy vintage systems from a hardware interest (which is why many like to create vintage systems that are true to the original), but I am more of a software guy and enjoy collecting running the broadest collection of vintage software that I can find and support on each vintage system - even if that means enhancing each build with 3rd party components of the day, or even augment with modern components (my hardware mod limit is sticking with the original system motherboard and BIOS of each system). Hence, I have a lot of software installed and running on each system and for each OS. Here is a list of the DOS system and applications I have installed which continues to grow.

Some of my IBM 5160 PC-XT-based 486 system (and growing):

IBM PC DOS 2000 (7.1)
CD Driver
Zip Drivers
BackPack 1.44MB Drive Driver
Intel 10/100B Packet Driver
Quarterdeck DeskView 2.0
Mansfield KEDIT WordPerfect 5.1
DWSCRIPT
IBM BookManager Read Acrobat (DOS)
IBM FileList
IBM Fixed Disk Organizer
System Utility: SysInfo7
SysTest
IBM 4019/4029 Soft Fonts
Database: Ashton-Tate dBase III Plus
Graphics/DOS: Harvard Graphics 2.0
Lotus 123 2.4
VisiCalc
QuickBooks Version 1.0
One Write Plus
QMODEM
ProComm+
TCP/IP Stack/DOS): mTCP
MTCP Winsock with a DOS shim
Arachne Browser
Space Invaders
Monopoly
Cyborgirl Pinball
Jeopardy
Programming/DOS: Turbo Pascal 6.0
MIDI Software: Voyetra
CDP (CDPlayer)
Point of Sale Cash Register
Family Tree Maker
Policies Now
Wheel of Fortune
IBM Script/PC


Windows 3.1
__________
Win32s
Calmira II (Win 95 UI clone)
Trumpet Winsock
MS Office 4.3
MS Word 6.0
MS PowerPoint 4.0
MS Excel 5.0
MS Access 2.0
WordPerfect 6.1 Suite
WordPerfect 6
Quatro Pro
Corel Presentations
CorelFlow
SideKick 2.0
Lotus 123 V5
MS Project 4.0
MS Publisher 2.0
Symantic ACT! 2.0 Windows
Turbo Pascal for Windows
Turbo Assembler
Kedit for Windows
WS/FTP pro
Internet Explorer 5.0
MS Outlook
Aldus PageMaker 4.0
Xing MPEG Player
Frame FrameMaker 4
Microsoft Video for Win 1.1
Adobe Photoshop 2.5
TopDown Flowcharter
Peachtree Accounting for Windows
Contact Master
MP3 Music Player: WinPlay3
Windows Writer (Pen)
QuickTime 2.1.2
MS Word 2.0


Regards,
Mike

Agent Orange
June 18th, 2016, 02:44 PM
I know a lot of folks enjoy vintage systems from a hardware interest (which is why many like to create vintage systems that are true to the original), but I am more of a software guy and enjoy collecting running the broadest collection of vintage software that I can find and support on each vintage system - even if that means enhancing each build with 3rd party components of the day, or even augment with modern components (my hardware mod limit is sticking with the original system motherboard and BIOS of each system). Hence, I have a lot of software installed and running on each system and for each OS. Here is a list of the DOS system and applications I have installed which continues to grow.

Some of my IBM 5160 PC-XT-based 486 system (and growing):

IBM PC DOS 2000 (7.1)
CD Driver
Zip Drivers
BackPack 1.44MB Drive Driver
Intel 10/100B Packet Driver
Quarterdeck DeskView 2.0
Mansfield KEDIT WordPerfect 5.1
DWSCRIPT
IBM BookManager Read Acrobat (DOS)
IBM FileList
IBM Fixed Disk Organizer
System Utility: SysInfo7
SysTest
IBM 4019/4029 Soft Fonts
Database: Ashton-Tate dBase III Plus
Graphics/DOS: Harvard Graphics 2.0
Lotus 123 2.4
VisiCalc
QuickBooks Version 1.0
One Write Plus
QMODEM
ProComm+
TCP/IP Stack/DOS): mTCP
MTCP Winsock with a DOS shim
Arachne Browser
Space Invaders
Monopoly
Cyborgirl Pinball
Jeopardy
Programming/DOS: Turbo Pascal 6.0
MIDI Software: Voyetra
CDP (CDPlayer)
Point of Sale Cash Register
Family Tree Maker
Policies Now
Wheel of Fortune
IBM Script/PC


Windows 3.1
__________
Win32s
Calmira II (Win 95 UI clone)
Trumpet Winsock
MS Office 4.3
MS Word 6.0
MS PowerPoint 4.0
MS Excel 5.0
MS Access 2.0
WordPerfect 6.1 Suite
WordPerfect 6
Quatro Pro
Corel Presentations
CorelFlow
SideKick 2.0
Lotus 123 V5
MS Project 4.0
MS Publisher 2.0
Symantic ACT! 2.0 Windows
Turbo Pascal for Windows
Turbo Assembler
Kedit for Windows
WS/FTP pro
Internet Explorer 5.0
MS Outlook
Aldus PageMaker 4.0
Xing MPEG Player
Frame FrameMaker 4
Microsoft Video for Win 1.1
Adobe Photoshop 2.5
TopDown Flowcharter
Peachtree Accounting for Windows
Contact Master
MP3 Music Player: WinPlay3
Windows Writer (Pen)
QuickTime 2.1.2
MS Word 2.0


Regards,
Mike

That's a lot of stuff! Have you given thought to using a DOS menu program like Direct Access (DA)?

nc_mike
June 18th, 2016, 03:06 PM
That's a lot of stuff! Have you given thought to using a DOS menu program like Direct Access (DA)?

Yah, I could, but I much prefer working from File Command and the command line :-)

Regards,
Mike

Agent Orange
June 18th, 2016, 04:44 PM
Yah, I could, but I much prefer working from File Command and the command line :-)

Regards,
Mike

If you like using the command line another option would be batch files.

Osgeld
June 18th, 2016, 07:17 PM
yea that's my thought batch it out to different boot configurations depending on what you want to do at that moment. IMO your building the path version of the homer

nc_mike
July 2nd, 2016, 03:56 AM
Doesn't NDOS and 4Dos both support PATH's longer then 255 chars?

Just want to say THANK YOU! I remember hearing about 4DOS decades ago and never had a hard need for it (I actually thought it was an OS at one time as I never really looks into it). It did the job - I now have support for very long PATH statements and for such a simple addition to any DOS system, provides an incredible set of DOS command extensions while being 100% compatible with DOS's original COMMAND.COM and nothing to relearn. I also like the fact that is saves even more RAM being loadable into upper memory. How did I ever go all these years without it!

Regards,
Mike