«

[Japo]

Well SB also work on FreeDOS (right?), still 6.x will always be better. Like Virtual PC, it emulates a perfectly working SB16 most of the time... but when I try to play Tomb Raider it doesn't work perfectly. Not to talk about other millions of issues I find if I try to play other DOS games in there--the same as in a real DR-DOS I'd bet. (Of course DOSBox beats any other solution for 99.9% of the games, real DOS 6.x included, but you already know that.)

I haven't checked myself, but according to the Wikipedia article, even though no 64-bits Windows (XP included) includes a VDM, the 32-bits version of Vista would have it just like XP. (Otherwise the article must be edited.)

[dosraider]

The 32 bits version has it, but other matters interfere on Vista (strict access restrictions, no low res graphical support -only low res txt support- .... and so on.... and so on.... blablabla ...)

[Japo]

Well the point was that ntvdm.exe never was any good except for console apps, and didn't provide sound on its own.

[dipo]

Originally Posted by fender178

With freedos I couldnt even get the sound to work so I said enough of this. Dosbox is heck of alot better than freedos.

Better? Them are two complete different things. The one is an emulator, the other one is an operating system.

For a newish PC user DOSBox is more easy to setup then FreeDOS.

Originally Posted by fettoswe

It would be nice to test freedos then it works 100% on my computer with sound and everything.

I am using FreeDOS and I have dualboot with 6.22, 7.1, 8.0 and FreeDOS. Never found any application running not in FreeDOS, but in MS-DOS.

After a lot fiddling with DOS now my real DOS with orignal SB card works better for me then DOSBox.

[tikbalang]

i used msdos 6.22 for a long time but my pick is msdos 7.1 from win9x (except early version of win95) because of its fat32 and xms 3.0 support. fat32 allows drive partitions greater than 2gb and xms3 allows the usage of more than 64mb installed ram.

i don't see how msdos 7.10 became incompatible with DOS games, when in fact, there were games for win9x that were actually dos games.

freedos has excellent dos utilities but the kernel is still a bit dodgy for games.

[red_avatar]

Just wondering but why would you want more than 64MB memory in DOS? No software was even made to use that much and if anything, certain games test for memory and if it's more than 32MB, these games tend to flip out and say you don't have enough.

[tikbalang]

i have not encountered the 32mb barrier so far but i have seen apps that keel over with more than 620kb base memory. any apps/games that use dos extenders (dos4g/dos4gw/pmode/dos32/cwsdpmi) tend to perform better with more ram. emulators, like dos mame is an example.

[Japo]

Originally Posted by tikbalang

i have not encountered the 32mb barrier so far but i have seen apps that keel over with more than 620kb base memory. any apps/games that use dos extenders (dos4g/dos4gw/pmode/dos32/cwsdpmi) tend to perform better with more ram. emulators, like dos mame is an example.

I have seen games crash in DOSBox if too much memory was enabled, then work fine if reduced. When the problem is too much conventional memory use the "loadfix" command--probably you already knew. In protected mode apps don't see different kinds of memory, I think.

[tikbalang]

i'd like to correct myself a bit (although i have not experimented enough to verify this).

msdos622 can have xms3 support if an xms3 driver is used. the himem.sys that came with it only support xms2, so the likely candidates are himem.sys from msdos71 or pcdos71, himemx/jemmex by japheth, or xmgr by jrellis.

*pcdos71 supports fat32 and is available from ibm website as part of its "IBM ServerGuide Scripting Toolkit, DOS Edition, version 1.3.07". it came after pcdos2000 (pcdos7 rev1).