I believe MS has now officially released the sources to MS-DOS 1.x, 2.x, and 4; but most of 3.x and 6.x were leaked many years ago, so I wonder if that's the reason they skipped 3.
Open Sourcing DOS 4
81–90 of 382 posts
Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of XP components are still in use in modern windows, whereas DOS was completely replaced around the time Windows XP came around.
Around the time Windows 2000 came around. Up to Windows 3.11 it was a GUI on top of DOS. Windows 95, 98, Me used DOS to boot and it was still possible to stop the booting process at a DOS prompt (although in Me this was no longer official). Finally Windows 2000 had nothing to do with it as it is NT based.
Windows 2000.
Also NT4, NT3.51, NT3.5, NT3.1...
Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#83So if MS-DOS 4 was released in 1986, and it is now 2024, that's a 37 year gap between release and open source. That means Windows XP should be open sourced by ... 2038. Not as far away as it seems. I'll add it to my calendar.
I'm more interested in them open-sourcing something from the 3.x/9x line.
NT seems to have been far more studied, and of course there were the infamous leaks of those along the way.
Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#84Weird that for a couple minutes, these paths existed: * https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/tree/main/v4.0/bin * https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/tree/main/v4.0/bin/DISK1 * https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/tree/main/v4.0/pdf But they disappeared as I browsed the repo. I guess they didn't want that part public? Edit: I knew I wasn't seeing things! Somebody forked it along with those files: https://github.com/Own…
Ya sorry we're moving stuff around
Thx for clearing the rights and for releasing, Scott. And of course thanks to Microsoft and IBM.
It would be fun at some point down the road to get some of the older code building and running again - particularly '84/'85-vintage Windows & Notes builds. Quite a lot of work, though, not just because of hardware but also likely because of toolchain gaps.
Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of XP components are still in use in modern windows, whereas DOS was completely replaced around the time Windows XP came around.
Around the time Windows 2000 came around. Up to Windows 3.11 it was a GUI on top of DOS. Windows 95, 98, Me used DOS to boot and it was still possible to stop the booting process at a DOS prompt (although in Me this was no longer official). Finally Windows 2000 had nothing to do with it as it is NT based.
Tangent, but Windows NT had a POSIX subsystem for a while.
Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#86[deleted]
Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
They force-pushed the repo to remove an insult towards Tim Patterson in one of the source files.
If this release is for historical research purposes, the release should be pristine including the unsavory bits. Whitewashing of history should never be accepted.
100%!
Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
At https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/blob/main/v4.0/src/DOS/S... it used to have Tim Patterson's full name whereas after the force push they abbreviated it to his initials "TP". I had the repo cloned before the force push and when I went to pull it, this file was the only one that contained a conflict.
Looks like the handiwork of Mark Zbikowski, whose initials adorn every EXE file. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Zbikowski
Mark is the one that committed today's source release, going off of the "MZ is back" commit message from GitHub user "mzbik".
Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#89Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Around the time Windows 2000 came around. Up to Windows 3.11 it was a GUI on top of DOS. Windows 95, 98, Me used DOS to boot and it was still possible to stop the booting process at a DOS prompt (although in Me this was no longer official). Finally Windows 2000 had nothing to do with it as it is NT based.
Windows 2000 was part of the professional NT line, though, and was the companion of Me for the millennium releases. As far as I know, 2000 wasn't marketed to home users. I think what the comment you replied to is saying is the the transition away from DOS wasn't completed for both professional and home markets until XP, which unified everything under NT for all markets.
Around the year 2000, I was studying computer science at a university. Most of their PC's ran on Windows 3.1. I was using it at home. But one day, Microsoft sent me an offer: I could purchase the student release of Windows 2000 workstation for a mere $25.00. I went for it, and found it better than the Windows NT nap-sayers at school said. I don't know why I was contacted. Probbably because of other Microsoft programs I'd bought at the student bookstore.