Re: DOS Emulator

["Robert Holmgren" holmgren@xxxxxxxx]

** Reply to message from michael.norman@xxxxxxxx on Tue, 21 Jan 2003 16:06:52
-0500


> So, in sum, if you want a DOS based OS to keep XyDos running in, say, a
> DosBox, and if you want a stable Win OS with a bios and drivers to run all
> the new devices and so on, either use a partition (XP, say, with W98
> partition) or use XP in full-screen dos emulation and live with the
> screen?...This assuming TAME is still too distracting and that DOS
> emulators mentioned here won't correct the DosBox jitters in XP. In other
> words, save the expensive and as yet untested (here) Virtual PC and the
> like, there are no other alternatives with the latest hardware/OS combos?

I was responding to the proposition that you should just go out and buy bare
iron, then install whatever OS you want. My comments about BIOS updating --
which is *much* more important than most people recognize, the number of
wierdnesses that are attributable to the BIOS, and solved by an upgrade, are
huge -- were entirely addressing that point. Phoenix and the others simply do
not offer BIOS upgrades; you MUST get them from "the manufacturer". And who,
with bare iron, is that? No, you should buy from a genuine computer company.
(Personally, I like IBM: they really really really support their machines.
Fifteen BIOS upgrades in 12 months on my T23 machine -- fifteen! Solving
*real* problems! And their BIOS flashes don't wreck the motherboard either. I
mean, you screw up a BIOS flash, and the jig is up.)

I'm *not* assuming that TAME, or emulators, or VPC, won't work. I simply don't
know whether they will solve the problem that's driving you nuts. But
obviously, if you want to support the latest of everything, you need the latest
OpSys. That, in the Windows world, is XP. But like Rene, I have a hard time
swallowing the registration concept embedded in XP, which prevents your $300
(just guessing) retail CD version of XP from being installed on more than one
machine. Since W2K doesn't need to be registered, and since XP seems to me (I
do have it on two machines) to be a tiny tweak of W2K (I think internally it
returns version "NT 5.1" or something, while W2K is "NT 5.0"), well... You
know, if users don't simply rebel and stop using this Microsoft stuff, they're
heading toward total imprisonment. People are such sheep.

Bottom line: I'd run Windows as a child of Linux. Wean off the M$ teat.

-----------------------------
Robert Holmgren
holmgren@xxxxxxxx
-----------------------------