This was a really fun video! Tech before my time, but I can't help but appreciate our technological roots that lead us to where we are today! Love ur vids!
22:07 Do any of the commands MODE CO80, MODE BW80, or MODE MONO work here on this version? If so, at least one of these would get you back to 80 column mode. Overall, this feels like a prototype of what would eventually become OS/2 1.0, albeit quite buggy as you point out.
@@vardekpetrovic9716 Well, I did look at Concurrent DOS last year and its windowing system was much more intuitive. I think this looks more like Microsoft trying to figure it out for themselves as they looked at DR's version.
Actual processes continuing to execute in the background I have to think in a PC of that era seems ambitious. Not much of a gamer but applications are more my thing and like to go back and see how productive these old systems can be. To me the Atari ST with mono screen and a hard disk with GDOS should be a productive WP/DTP setup but it became such a bind opening and closing applications to touch up artwork, jump in to a spreadsheet and then go back to the DTP/WP to assemble it all. Not having to save, close open, close. An application switcher in itself is a big win. The Amiga could do and of course more , but, oops guru meditation and its print engine core was hopeless and left it all almost to the application. Think people forget how hard it was to use machines then to do real work.
The Sinclair QL could do this really well. It had a very stable preemptive multitasking microkernel in 1984. It, unlike the Amiga, had memory protection built-in so the OS was safer from being corrupted.
DOS 5 had a sort of multitasking system. I remember it was a memory hog. So were all the versions of Windows until XP. I did like the thrill of managing the memory placement and usage. I'm always up for a good challenge.
Hi, Nice Video Oh i remember this thing - but not fondly The multitasking was not what people expected, most people were comparing to the Amiga 500 that was released about 12 months prior This thing was more like multi shell, but run one task at a time, which is why the basic program was paused The only usefull thing i saw it do was get ready to print, the jump to a 3rd party app like sideways print - set that up save config, then go back and print Base memory was very low compared to dos 3.31, most people just kept to the older os and did not upgrade Dos 5 was a real game changed with memmaker and for me at work, the ability to load printer and lan files in extended / memory and free up base memory I cannot remember my apple mac os history but similarly it could load multiple program but only one executed at any given time - i cannot remember when multitasking came in Back to the Amiga, the Os you could multitask and allocate priority eg write in word perfect, then print, the jump to music or spreadsheet that was more of a time sharing where each program was given a priority or sort of CPU resource percentage Regards George
Oh cool, someone that actually saw it back in the day. Yes, it doesn't behave like it's preemptive, though it may be implemented that way (it splits a number in half of a BASIC print statement which is a big hint) but perhaps completely halts the swapped out jobs (maybe it couldn't deal with screen updates properly). The Amiga actually does the same thing when you play with job priorities I've done a few videos on the Amiga's multitasking OS. The last one looked at an improvement where it gave Unix like "nice" control over jobs (May 11th of this year).
Yeah. DOS 4 wasn't great. As you mentioned, DOS 5 was a lot better. As for the first Amiga, that was released in 1985 and demonstrated in 1984. I'm surprised this video mentions issues with the Amiga Exec (from the Amiga video in the same series). I thought people had already established that the 'tests' done in that video were irrelevant and that it's best to not try to override taskpri for best results. I.e. AmigaOS knows what its doing and is best left to it's own devices (no pun intended).
Interesting to see this. I used CDOS a lot in the 80s, but I only ever read about this multitasking MS-DOS and never saw it. I assume it doesn't have any support y for serial terminals. That was the really good thing about CDOS. A whole Office could run on one machine, greatly reducing costs. We had as many as 32 serial ports on 386 based machines runntng CDOS.
I do recall that feature of Concurrent DOS. I think Retro Tech Chris did a video on that feature for #DOScember a few years ago. But yes, I did like Concurrent DOS better. I'm a big fan, in fact of Gary Kildall. Wish he'd have the success that Bill Gates did, but Gary was more of a creator (I think he was a professor) than a business man.
From MS DOS we can switch into a refreshrate controlled (160hz) videomode with an analog CRT-Monitor or videomodes for LCD/LED 16:9 and 16: 10 aspect ratio widescreen resolution like 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 with modern graphic card with VBE 3 graphic bios for PCIe slot using the linear framebuffer. And then we can switch from 16 bit into 32 bit and 64 bit mode and then we can startup all 4 cores of a quadcore CPU for multiprocessing, but we need a mainboard with an ibm compatibel bios to boot MS DOS.
How to use a primary and a secondary monitor with a graphic card with two output signal in MS DOS and how to get the EDID monitor data from the secondary monitor in MS DOS? With some graphic cards i got a no signal message on the secondary monitor and other cards are in clone mode and both monitor display the content of the primary linear framebuffer. How to use the secondary framebuffer in DOS? I searched it in the linux source multiple times.
I asked a friend who's a bit more knowledgeable on DOS stuff: "You can't do what he's trying to do. DOS PCs support a monochrome display adapter plus any other color adapter. It sounds like he's trying to use two VGA adapters at the same time, which is not supported by any BIOS. It is technically possible with two PCI cards, but he must do all of the programming himself."
@8BitRetroJournal With Windows and with Linux we can use the primary and the secondary monitor with one graphic card. In Windows device manager we can find the linear address of the primary and the secondary linear framebuffer both addresses in the 4th gigabyte. In DOS Using 16 bit function 4f01 with a mode number from the mode table(from function 4f00) number + 4000 hex of VBE 2 or VBE 3 bios for mode specific info we can get the address of the primary linear framebuffer, if the mode support the linear frame buffer. The linear address of the linear frame buffer can vary from card to card, but all modes of a card use the same linear address. I think Ralph Browns routine for two PCI cards is not made for the linear frame buffer of VBE 2/VBE 3 mode numbers.
Oh yes, that and TopView are on my radar for future videos.In fact TopView was next but with MS-DOS 4.00 source being released it got me looking at that first.
This was a really fun video! Tech before my time, but I can't help but appreciate our technological roots that lead us to where we are today! Love ur vids!
22:07 Do any of the commands MODE CO80, MODE BW80, or MODE MONO work here on this version? If so, at least one of these would get you back to 80 column mode.
Overall, this feels like a prototype of what would eventually become OS/2 1.0, albeit quite buggy as you point out.
I'll have to try them...I didn't know they existed.
@@vardekpetrovic9716 Well, I did look at Concurrent DOS last year and its windowing system was much more intuitive. I think this looks more like Microsoft trying to figure it out for themselves as they looked at DR's version.
I had that same joystick in the 1980's.
Actual processes continuing to execute in the background I have to think in a PC of that era seems ambitious. Not much of a gamer but applications are more my thing and like to go back and see how productive these old systems can be. To me the Atari ST with mono screen and a hard disk with GDOS should be a productive WP/DTP setup but it became such a bind opening and closing applications to touch up artwork, jump in to a spreadsheet and then go back to the DTP/WP to assemble it all. Not having to save, close open, close. An application switcher in itself is a big win. The Amiga could do and of course more , but, oops guru meditation and its print engine core was hopeless and left it all almost to the application. Think people forget how hard it was to use machines then to do real work.
The Sinclair QL could do this really well. It had a very stable preemptive multitasking microkernel in 1984. It, unlike the Amiga, had memory protection built-in so the OS was safer from being corrupted.
DOS 5 had a sort of multitasking system. I remember it was a memory hog. So were all the versions of Windows until XP. I did like the thrill of managing the memory placement and usage. I'm always up for a good challenge.
And all versions after XP are exponentially worse memory hogs..
But... XP is quite much more demanding comparing to 2k
Hi, Nice Video
Oh i remember this thing - but not fondly
The multitasking was not what people expected, most people were comparing to the Amiga 500 that was released about 12 months prior
This thing was more like multi shell, but run one task at a time, which is why the basic program was paused
The only usefull thing i saw it do was get ready to print, the jump to a 3rd party app like sideways print - set that up save config, then go back and print
Base memory was very low compared to dos 3.31, most people just kept to the older os and did not upgrade
Dos 5 was a real game changed with memmaker and for me at work, the ability to load printer and lan files in extended / memory and free up base memory
I cannot remember my apple mac os history but similarly it could load multiple program but only one executed at any given time - i cannot remember when multitasking came in
Back to the Amiga, the Os you could multitask and allocate priority eg write in word perfect, then print, the jump to music or spreadsheet that was more of a time sharing where each program was given a priority or sort of CPU resource percentage
Regards
George
Oh cool, someone that actually saw it back in the day. Yes, it doesn't behave like it's preemptive, though it may be implemented that way (it splits a number in half of a BASIC print statement which is a big hint) but perhaps completely halts the swapped out jobs (maybe it couldn't deal with screen updates properly). The Amiga actually does the same thing when you play with job priorities
I've done a few videos on the Amiga's multitasking OS. The last one looked at an improvement where it gave Unix like "nice" control over jobs (May 11th of this year).
Yeah. DOS 4 wasn't great. As you mentioned, DOS 5 was a lot better. As for the first Amiga, that was released in 1985 and demonstrated in 1984. I'm surprised this video mentions issues with the Amiga Exec (from the Amiga video in the same series). I thought people had already established that the 'tests' done in that video were irrelevant and that it's best to not try to override taskpri for best results. I.e. AmigaOS knows what its doing and is best left to it's own devices (no pun intended).
Interesting to see this. I used CDOS a lot in the 80s, but I only ever read about this multitasking MS-DOS and never saw it. I assume it doesn't have any support y for serial terminals. That was the really good thing about CDOS. A whole Office could run on one machine, greatly reducing costs. We had as many as 32 serial ports on 386 based machines runntng CDOS.
I do recall that feature of Concurrent DOS. I think Retro Tech Chris did a video on that feature for #DOScember a few years ago. But yes, I did like Concurrent DOS better. I'm a big fan, in fact of Gary Kildall. Wish he'd have the success that Bill Gates did, but Gary was more of a creator (I think he was a professor) than a business man.
bro what keyboard are you using? - nice sounds.
I think it's a Dell keyboard.
From MS DOS we can switch into a refreshrate controlled (160hz) videomode with an analog CRT-Monitor or videomodes for LCD/LED 16:9 and 16: 10 aspect ratio widescreen resolution like 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 with modern graphic card with VBE 3 graphic bios for PCIe slot using the linear framebuffer. And then we can switch from 16 bit into 32 bit and 64 bit mode and then we can startup all 4 cores of a quadcore CPU for multiprocessing, but we need a mainboard with an ibm compatibel bios to boot MS DOS.
How to use a primary and a secondary monitor with a graphic card with two output signal in MS DOS and how to get the EDID monitor data from the secondary monitor in MS DOS? With some graphic cards i got a no signal message on the secondary monitor and other cards are in clone mode and both monitor display the content of the primary linear framebuffer. How to use the secondary framebuffer in DOS? I searched it in the linux source multiple times.
I asked a friend who's a bit more knowledgeable on DOS stuff: "You can't do what he's trying to do. DOS PCs support a monochrome display adapter plus any other color adapter. It sounds like he's trying to use two VGA adapters at the same time, which is not supported by any BIOS. It is technically possible with two PCI cards, but he must do all of the programming himself."
@8BitRetroJournal With Windows and with Linux we can use the primary and the secondary monitor with one graphic card. In Windows device manager we can find the linear address of the primary and the secondary linear framebuffer both addresses in the 4th gigabyte.
In DOS Using 16 bit function 4f01 with a mode number from the mode table(from function 4f00) number + 4000 hex of VBE 2 or VBE 3 bios for mode specific info we can get the address of the primary linear framebuffer, if the mode support the linear frame buffer.
The linear address of the linear frame buffer can vary from card to card, but all modes of a card use the same linear address.
I think Ralph Browns routine for two PCI cards is not made for the linear frame buffer of VBE 2/VBE 3 mode numbers.
Aldo is probably hooking the keyboard completely, so no keystrokes are getting to SM while it is running.
I used DESQview back then, much better.
Oh yes, that and TopView are on my radar for future videos.In fact TopView was next but with MS-DOS 4.00 source being released it got me looking at that first.
If anyone thinks Windows 11 24H2 is bad, DOS 4 was the pits. Thank goodness for DOS 5.
I'm still at Windows 10. I kind of follow the "skip ever--other-one model" so I've only run 98, XP, 7, and 10, skipping 95, ME, Vista, 8 and 11.
Hello mikku,.. thrown you a green uno card.
September? 😂