Op 20-8-2011 7:47, Michael C. Robinson schreef: > I'm thinking of modern video cards and multiple core processors. > I would imagine that Freedos in 16 bit mode can't use multiple > cores. One of the problems with DOS that I recall is a total > lack of hardware protection. This allowed direct hardware > access, which is fast. Unfortunately, accessing hardware directly > instead of through a well defined interface makes supporting that > software a nightmare.
Programs could be optimized to access these devices themselves, however there's hardly ever any point to doing so as not many programs require a lot of processing power. > Is producing a 32 bit protected mode Freedos or even a 64 bit version > of Freedos dead? I'm thinking that Freedos should be able to support > multiple processing cores and other modern hardware. OpenGem should be > upgraded to work on 32 or 64 bit systems. Another consideration, a 32 > bit or 64 bit variant of Freedos should protect the hardware. An open > networking standard should exist in a 32 or 64 bit version of Freedos > supporting most of the popular network cards. A 32 or 64 bit Freedos > that can simulate a 16 bit DOS environment where there is standard well > supported virtual hardware is a thought. Think virtual printers for > WordPerfect 6.0 that the standard install disks provide drivers for. There exists a FreeDOS32 somewhere in alpha-status, but no idea what its goals and/or use-cases were. I'd suggest you have a look at running ReactOS (opensource win32 implementation) or some specific light Linux distro. Or Haiku as operating system :) > On the subject of word processing, it would be nice if Freedos could > run a WordPerfect equivalent program that is licensed under the GPL. I don't know of anything like this. On the annoying side there's LaTex, on the other annoying side there's Abiword and LibreOffice/OpenOffice. > I'm thinking the goal for protected mode Freedos that is 32 or 64 bit > should be providing a hypervisor to run multiple instances of 16 bit > Freedos or even Linux instances. I think 32/64 bit Freedos should be > the minimum that is needed to provide hardware protection, memory > management, etcetera. After all, DOS systems are supposed to be simple, > light, and really fast. VMware ESXi, Linux's KVM and Citrix Xen seem to be free hypervisors. Unfortunately not small enough to fit into BIOS or UEFI, so usually a USB-stick, harddisk or disk-on-module is being used. > Why Freedos? What are the defining reasons and goals for the coming 1.1 > release? Except for certain smart phones and other embedded computers, > does Freedos really have a niche anymore? The niche is running old existing software, as well as hobby parts, flashing BIOS if that doesn't have its own ways of upgrading etc. DOS is quite usefull to be educated in, then move on to Linux :) As a hobby and experimenting platform it's also nice. But you're right, there aren't that many usecases anymore, nor does it matter. It's not like we're trying to promote an operating system as desktop OS (and meanwhile make futile attempts to neglect the entire Windows eco-system). > Syllable is it's own operating system, but could a 32 bit version of > Freedos or even a 64 bit version of Freedos run it under emulation? I don't know Syllable. All I know as exotic stuff is MenuetOS. > > OpenGL support would be nice, but a 32 bit GUI is needed for that. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2 _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
