4 ms·
I always wondered what the world would be like if Microsoft had just made a 32 bit DOS instead of going down the WinNT/95 route. Most of the headache in config
by civility 7y ago
I always wondered what the world would be like if Microsoft had just made a 32 bit DOS instead of going down the WinNT/95 route. Most of the headache in config.sys and friends was because you were working around the 16 bit address space. However, there was something really nice about owning your entire machine and only needing command.com for the "operating system". Compare this to full operating systems which consume gigabytes of disk and memory.
This hypothetical 32 bit DOS could've had memory protection and multitasking too. Obviously device drivers would add complexity, but it doesn't need to be as complex as it's become.
- resoluteteeth 7y agoDOS isn't even an operating system in the modern sense. Once you add preemptive multitasking and memory protection, you're simply going to end up with a normal modern operating system kernel again. On the other hand, the stuff that takes "gigabytes of disk and memory" isn't even part of the operating system kernel, so there's no need to start from DOS to get rid of that stuff. It's possible to run linux from a few megabytes of ram.
- civility 7y ago> Once you add preemptive multitasking and memory protection, you're simply going to end up with a normal modern operating system kernel again. You're missing the point. There is no single file operating system for desktop users (maybe VxWorks or some other embedded OS falls into that category, but those aren't really for desktops). Modern operating systems sprawl all over the disk. Memory protection and multitasking are not large features, and CS undergrads all over the world routinely implement them in less a semester. > It's possible to run linux from a few megabytes of ram. A few megs of ram and a directory in /etc filled with startup stuff and config files. Clearly you don't appreciate it, but there was something really nice about being in the root directory and seeing only command.com and config.sys. The entire rest of the machine was yours to setup however you liked. The things most people hated about DOS really had more to do with the 16 bit address space and segmented architecture.
- raverbashing 7y agoFiles are cheap now and even a linux initrd file has a lot of files inside it DOS had other files besides those, but they were hidden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_DOS_system_files https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_DOS_system_files You could theoretically make a linux kernel will all the drivers you need linked + basic FS stored as a drive image so you would have fewer files on an image
- zielmicha 7y agoOpenWRT runs on routers with 8MB of flash and 64MB of RAM and it includes whole wifi stack, routing and browser based GUI. https://openwrt.org/supported_devices/432_warning https://openwrt.org/supported_devices/432_warning
- nitrogen 7y agoThere was a company that made a multi-user 32-bit DOS called TSX-32. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSX-32 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSX-32
- nickpsecurity 7y agoProbably FreeDOS with third-party GUI's or desktop distros like N2K-OS: http://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page http://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page https://www.bttr-software.de/freesoft/desktops.htm https://www.bttr-software.de/freesoft/desktops.htm https://sourceforge.net/projects/n2kos/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/n2kos/